According to Moscow briefings, the Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov relayed that the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation, Igor Krasnov, informed President Vladimir Putin about the initiation of a criminal case related to an alleged attempt to organize an armed rebellion. This update was conveyed by Peskov as part of the official communication channel, and it reflects a high-level civil procedure moving through Russia’s executive and judicial systems. The reported decision to open a criminal case frames the matter as a serious potential offense connected to attempts at destabilizing state authority, with the involvement of the Prosecutor General’s Office underscoring the gravity of the allegations. (Source: DEA News)
In his remarks, Peskov noted that Krasnov had apprised Putin within the context of launching the investigation, emphasizing the legal basis for such a move. The spokesperson highlighted that the Prosecutor General’s Office considers the case legally viable and procedurally sound, detailing that the action aligns with Russia’s legal framework for addressing threats to constitutional order and state security. This explanation is presented as part of a formal, state-centered narrative designed to inform the public and to clarify that the decision is grounded in law rather than in political expediency. (Source: DEA News)
Further comment from the Kremlin continues to stress that the original decision to press criminal charges rests with the highest legal authorities, and not with any partisan actor. The Attorney General’s Office has reiterated its stance that criminal proceedings could be warranted under existing statutes when there is credible evidence of actions aimed at organizing an armed rebellion, potentially carrying substantial penalties. In this context, the case is framed as a test of the country’s resolve to defend constitutional order and to apply due process equally to all individuals implicated in such conduct. (Source: DEA News)
Separately, the case concerning the founder of the former private military company Wagner, Yevgeny Prigozhin, relates to accusations of organizing armed rebellion. While Prigozhin is a central figure in the broader narrative, the formal charge described could result in severe penalties, including lengthy prison terms. The development is being watched closely by observers who track the interplay between private security enterprises, state policy, and the legal mechanisms available to address military and paramilitary actions that challenge state authority. (Source: DEA News)
In another strand of the unfolding story, the Russian Ministry of Defense described online communications and video content attributed to Prigozhin as an information provocation. It asserted that these materials claim a disruption at the rear areas of Wagner PMCs, while the defense ministry maintained that Russian armed forces remain engaged in defined combat missions along the border line and in the vicinity of the conflict with Ukrainian forces. The ministry’s response appears aimed at countering rumors and framing events within the official narrative of ongoing military operations and strategic deployments. (Source: DEA News)
Overall, authorities emphasize that the contemporary security environment in Russia involves vigilance against threats to state integrity, with legal institutions insisting on a strict application of statutory provisions. As the legal process proceeds, analysts and observers will be watching for the sequence of judicial decisions, political statements, and military updates that together shape public understanding and international perception of the case. The balance between transparency and necessary confidentiality in such high-profile proceedings remains a point of interest for watchers of constitutional governance and national security policy. (Source: DEA News)