Court of the European Union has maintained sanctions against Dmitry Kiselev

Court of the European Union has maintained sanctions against Dmitry Kiselev

LUXEMBOURG, 15 Jun — RIA Novosti. The European court of General jurisdiction (General court) in Luxembourg decided to maintain the restrictive measures of the European Union introduced in relation to the head of the MIA “Russia Today” journalist Dmitry Kiselev due to the situation around Ukraine, evidenced by the court’s decision.

Based on the text of a court decision, it ruled to reject the lawsuit Kiselyov for sanctions relief. The court delivered its decision that rejected all grounds for the lifting of sanctions, which led the plaintiff, shows the text of the court decision.

Of procedure of the court allow appeal against this decision in the higher court, namely the Court of Justice.

Kiselyov, in connection with the verdict expressed the view that Russians in the cases against the European bureaucracy is almost defenseless.

“Two years ago I decided to challenge in court the personal sanctions that the EU imposed against me. In the course of litigation, while slowly cranking the gears of the judicial branch of the European Union, the wheels of another branch — the Executive — spinning much more quickly. Every six months the arguments in favor of sanctions was supplemented with new formulations. That is, until we in Luxembourg have challenged in court the false statement that I “supported the introduction of Russian troops in Ukraine” (“supporting the deployment of Russian forces in Ukraine”) — and I never did in Brussels, meanwhile, added new arguments in favor of sanctions. Of the latest list of sins — my message in the program “Vesti Nedeli” that the Crimean bridge would hold possiblle earthquake,” he said.

According to him, European bureaucrats obviously invincible, “because the cases against them in courts move at a snail’s pace”.

“As they say, tired of swallowing dust. Thus, any citizen of Russia, dared to challenge in court sanctions against him, in fact, deprived of the right to protection. For example, I was not given the opportunity to personally participate in the hearing of my case. The trial was in absentia, although in writing I have requested to attend. And even if I were given this opportunity, then the procedure is arranged so that lifting of sanctions is impossible. Felt personal experience. It remains only to enjoy the sophistication of the wording of the verdict. After hearings, the court worked on these lines for almost nine months,” — said Kiselev.