Court in Kalmykia supports journalist

On December 25, the Supreme Court of Kalmykia granted the cassation appeal of Semen Ateyev, journalist of the newspaper "Sovietskaya Kalmykia Segodnia", with regard to protection of honor and dignity.

The court panel on civil cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kalmykia has granted the cassation appeal of Semen Ateyev, journalist of the newspaper "Sovietskaya Kalmykia Segodnia" and president of the Kalmykia human rights center, and invalidated the rulings of Elista city court dated November 27, 2008.
 
Previously, the Elista city court refused to grant his statement of claim to defend his honor and dignity. According to judge Manzhikkova T.P., the defendants did not disseminate any information about him which was false and defaming him; they only expressed personal and appraisal views about the article "Actors" published in the newspaper "Sovietskaya Kalmykia Segodnia".

For reference, Semen Ateyev has published in the newspaper his own opinion about the Russia-Georgia conflict with regard to South Ossetia. After its publication in the republic's printed and electronic media, critical materials appeared in which Semen Ateyev was accused of betraying the interests of Russia, called a "pro-Westerner" who worked for the money of destructive organizations.

The "Caucasian Knot" correspondent has learnt that the republic's television broadcast information that Ateyev was engaged in undermining activity and extremism in the interests of states which are hostile towards Russia. He was ostensibly instigating national hostility between Georgians and Ossetians, between Russians and Kalmuks, between Abkhasians and Georgians. He also made treacherous declarations which defamed the Kalmykian nation.

The Supreme Court held that the defendants - the state TV and radio company "Kalmukia", branch of the Federal state TV and radio company, journalists Koldaeva N. I., Selninov V. V., and Bondarev V.V., a natural person, had broadcast information about the plaintiff which was false and defaming him. Additionally, the court obliged the defendants to refute such information and compensate the moral damage inflicted on him by disseminating such information.