On 8 November 2007, the Collegium for Criminal Affairs of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (RF), having examined in session the denial by the Prosecutor General of the RF of motions presented to and denied by him concerning the rehabilitation of the Holy Royal Passion Bearers, ruled that Emperor Nicholas II and members of his family did not qualify for rehabilitation, citing Article 10 of the Law of the RF “Concerning the Rehabilitation of the Victims of Political Repression.”

This decision of the Collegium for Criminal Affairs of the Supreme Court of the RF is illegal and groundless.

The Collegium for Criminal Affairs of the Supreme Court of the RF has from the start taken the position of the Prosecutor General of the RF and has not examined the arguments of the Head of the Russian Imperial House, H.I.H. Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna, which prove the use by the totalitarian, godless, Soviet government of political oppression against the Royal Family.

This ruling regarding the members of the Royal Family as not qualifying for rehabilitation ignores the sense and the goal of the Law of the RF “Concerning the Rehabilitation of the Victims of Political Repression,” the Preamble of which states: “The goal of this Law is the rehabilitation of ALL victims of political repression who had been subject to such repression on the territory of the Russian Federation from 25 October (7 November) 1917, the restoration of their civil rights, the remedying of other consequences of persecution, and the guaranteeing of full compensation at the present time of property losses.”

The reference by the Collegium for Criminal Affairs of the Supreme Court of the RF to Article 10 of the Law of the RF “Concerning the Rehabilitation of the Victims of Political Repression” is specious since the law contemplates various scenarios of political repression, the victims of which are due rehabilitation. The loss of documentation or the otherwise failure to produce documentary evidence cannot be an obstacle to rehabilitation of persons whose victimization can be established by other sources of information. If we take the point of view of the General Prosecutor of the RF and of the Collegium for Criminal Affairs of the Supreme Court of the RF, any victim of repression could be denied rehabilitation for the simple reason that someone had destroyed or had lost documentation proving repression. This is a legally absurd position to take since, of course, it would exclude the possibility of rehabilitation to ALL victim of political repression, which is required by the Law of the RF “Concerning the Rehabilitation of the Victims of Political Repression.”

The rejection by the Collegium for Criminal Affairs of the Supreme Court of the RF to recognize the Holy Royal Passion Bearers as deserving of rehabilitation once again demonstrates that, in this matter, the decision was political and not legal, and that behind this decision stand forces that are striving to reestablish elements of Soviet totalitarianism against the interests of the current Russian government, which has proclaimed itself the heir to all periods of the centuries-long history of Russia and has proclaimed its respect for the memory of ancestors who have bequeathed to us a love and respect for the Fatherland, and faith in goodness and justice (see the Preamble to the Constitution of the RF). The opposition to the legal rehabilitation of the Holy Royal Passion Bearers and, consequently, the assistance to the political rehabilitation of the terrorist Communist regime, which perpetrated a genocide on the flower of the nation, is in clear dissonance with the recent statement by the President V. V. Putin, made at Butovo at the memorial ceremony on the Day of Remembrance of Victims of Political Repression.

The effort of these forces amounts to an attempt to reestablish class-based discrimination with respect to the Holy Royal Passion Bearers and against the current Head and members of the Russian Imperial House.

The ruling of the Collegium for Criminal Affairs of the Supreme Court of the RF will be appealed.

Moscow, 8 November 2007