Portrait of a matched pair squared

Andrey,¹Andrey Suvorkov, born 1993. Articles 282.2(1), 282.3(1) of the RF CrC. Time in custody: 3 days in the TDF, 114 days in Detention Center № 1 for the Kirov Region, 193 days under house arrest. He was given a suspended sentence of 6 years and 3 months in June 2022.the son of Svetlana Suvorkova, fell in love with a girl was also named Svetlana. When they got married, there were two Svetlana Suvorkovas in the family.

Having a very common first and last name, I’m used to Elena Volkov namesakes. But in this case, it is not a coincidence, but symbolic, and it speaks of a family’s legacy and solidarity.

What initials should I use to designate them in the interview? I resort to my beloved English: the mother, Svetlana, will be called “Senior” (“Sr.”) and the daughter-in-law, Svetlana, will be “Junior” (“Jr.”) – Svetlana, Sr. and Svetlana, Jr.

– Svetlana, Jr., how long have you known your husband’s family?

– Jr.: Since 2012, when I started attending the meetings of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Andrey’s mother and I became friends right away, we have a lot in common.

– Did your parents match you up or did you choose each other?

– Jr.: We liked each other, and our parents supported us. Svetlana and Yevgeniy accepted me as their own.

– Sr.: There were two parallel processes. I could see only Svetlana as my son’s future wife.

– Jehovah’s Witnesses are known for learning how to overcome interethnic and other social conflicts within their community. Have they alsolearned to resolve classic family conflicts with love? A mother-in-law and daughter-in-law are rarely friends.

– Sr.: We have peace and harmony.

– So, your “family squared” began with the friendship of two women, the two Svetlanas, which I am guessing has grown stronger through the difficult trials of the past three years. Tell me how the persecution of your family began.

October 9, 2018: Five searches at six in the morning

– Sr.: When the legal entities of Jehovah’s Witnesses were banned in 2017, we were shocked. I realized that if they started prosecuting in Kirov, it would affect us.

– Is that what happened?

– Sr.: We ended up being the first case. There were three criminal cases in Kirov, but the last case became the first, because our case has dragged on for a long time.

– The last became first. A Biblical irony of fate. Are there any verdicts yet in Kirov?

– Sr.: There are – fines.

– They should be acquittals; but against the backdrop of prison sentences in other cities, fines seem like a victory.

– Sr.: It sounds paradoxical, but we are glad that there are fines and not prison sentences.

– When did they come to your home?

– Sr.: On October 9, 2018, almost three and a half years ago, at six in the morning, they came to five apartments in the city of Kirov.

– You both give the impression of being vulnerable, hypersensitive people. How did you survive the search?

– Sr.: At first it was a severe psychological blow. But I have to give credit to the law enforcement officers – they conducted the searches in a fairly orderly way – at least they didn’t hit us. Of course, they shouted and spoke rudely, but they didn’t use physical force. There were eight people – two were wearing masks and had machine guns, police officers, and two attesting witnesses (I recognized them by their bare feet and slippers). They burst into the hallway, where my husband Yevgeniy Suvorkov²Yevgeniy Anatolyevich Suvorkov, born 1978. Articles 282.2(1), 282.3(1) of the RF CrC: Time in custody: 3 days in the TDF, 174 days in Detention Center № 1 in the Kirov Region, 181 days under house arrest. He was given a suspended sentence of 6 years and 3 months in June 2022.asked why they had come. One policeman confronted me, he kept asking me, “Where are the phones, tablets, and bank cards? Where are the phones, tablets, and bank cards?” Many times.

But I was in shock – I couldn’t say anything. He kept screaming and screaming, and I just stood there and didn’t say anything. Suddenly he asked me, “Are you feeling sick?” – “Yes, I am.” And he immediately turned and walked away.

My husband was standing by the wall. I asked the policemen, “Why did you come here?” They answered, “Who are you?” – “I’m his wife.” – “Well, shut up, wife.” They let my husband read the search warrant, but they didn’t let me.

– What contempt for a woman! And they even used the familiar form of “you”?

– Sr.: Yes, but that was not the worst of it. Their attitude was ‘since you’re here, just sit and shut up.’ I was lightly dressed, but they were wearing jackets; they felt hot, so they opened the balcony door. They let me get dressed, but one of them went into my room with me.

They searched systematically, clockwise around the room: they moved the upholstered furniture and checked the cupboards, but they didn’t pour out our grain or empty the soil out of our flowerpots.

– Who did they take away after the search?

– Sr: My husband and my son – Yevgeniy and Andrey Suvorkov. My son and Svetlana weren’t living with us; the searches were conducted in both apartments simultaneously.

– First, they took them to a TDF, and then to the pretrial detention center? When did you next see Andrey after the search?

– Jr.: Two days later, at the court session on preventive measures; he was already behind bars.

– This was before the pandemic, so you were allowed into the court?

– Jr.: Yes. At first, each of the five people had a court session on preventive measures every two months, and we attended one another’s sessions. And there were also appeal hearings. There were many sessions. Then they consolidated the five defendants into one case.

The lawyers insisted that everyone be released from the detention center. Vladimir Korobeynikov was the first to be put under house arrest, because his wife and daughter need care. Then they released my husband Andrey and Maksim Khalturin (whose parents also needed care), and two months later Yevgeniy, Svetlana’s husband. Andrzej Oniszczuk was kept in the detention center for the longest time – 11 months – and we all went to his court sessions.

– Why was the foreigner – Andrzej, a Pole – treated the most harshly?

– Jr., Sr.: We don’t know.

Posthumous Trial

– How many people in total are being tried in this case: five, six, or seven? Why do they give different numbers?

– Sr.: First they detained five in one day, on October 9, 2018, and in February they added three more. But one left, and it became seven. Then one died, and it became six.³Criminal proceedings on charges of extremism were initiated against seven local residents, five of whom were taken into custody, including a Polish citizen, 52-year-old Andrzej Oniszczuk, who spent almost a year in detention without being able to communicate with his wife even by phone. His fellow believers spent from 2 to 11 months in custody and from 6 to 9 months under house arrest. One of the defendants, 64-year-old Yuriy Geraskov, died of a long illness a week before the court started considering the merits of the case. The investigator knew about the believer’s condition but did not terminate criminal proceedings. In January 2021, the hearings started at the Pervomayskiy District Court in Kirov. The defendants: Yevgeniy and Andrey Suvorkov, Maksim Khalturin, Vladimir Korobeynikov, Andrzej Oniszczuk, Vladimir Vasilyev, and Yuriy Geraskov (posthumously). In June 2022, the believers were given suspended sentences for terms between 2.5 to 6.5 years. Yuriy Geraskov was declared guilty of extremism, but the criminal case was dropped in connection with his death. In April 2020, Yuriy Geraskov died; he was the most kind-hearted man. He had cancer, but he would have lived longer if it weren’t for the stress of the search and the criminal case. He and his wife loved each other very much. That loss hit us all very hard. They wouldn’t even allow us to attend his funeral because of the pandemic.

– The trial killed this man. So why is his name still in the criminal case after his death?

– Jr.: They continue to prosecute him, even after his death; and his lawyer is participating in that process so that Yuriy’s name can be cleared, even if posthumously.

– You attended many trials, but were you allowed visiting rights?

– Sr.: No, not even once. That was the investigator’s fundamental position – not to give anyone visiting rights. We wrote legal requests and he denied them; we took him to court – but, predictably, we lost. I sued four times over the denial of visiting rights.

– You can take the investigator to court?

– Sr.: You can, but you can never win. It’s pure formality, not a trial. The judge only went into his chambers for a second: he slammed the door and came back out.

– In the Krasnodar Territory, a lawyer told me a similar story: the judge would walk up to the door of his chambers, turn around, and go back to his seat.

– Sr.: So now we’ve realized that all decisions are made before the trial.

Epistolary life

– That’s enough to give you a heart attack. Who supported you? Who could you confide in? Friends? Relatives? Your fellow believers?

– Jr.: We – the wives of those arrested – stuck together. Many of our fellow believers came to the trials, which was a great source of support for us: we felt that we were not alone – our friends were with us.

The court bailiffs treated all of us harshly: “Up against the wall! Get out of the way! Stay back!”

– They didn’t allow you to hug Andrey and Yevgeniy?

– Jr.: No, we couldn’t even get closer than a few yards away. Taking photographs was forbidden.

– Did they accept your parcels at the detention center?

– Jr.: Yes. In their letters, Yevgeniy and Andrey told us what they needed.

– Is there a store in the detention center?

– Sr.: It’s very poorly stocked and expensive, but we had to buy dairy products there because if we put them in our parcels, they wouldn’t accept them.

– Were you able to make phone calls?

– Sr.: No visits, no phone calls. Only letters.

– Jr.: For the first three weeks neither they nor we received any letters. Then they started to come, sometimes even quickly, in two or three days.

– The mailbox became the center of your life – your friend and your hope?

– Jr.: Yes. The New Year’s vacation break was especially hard, because when the censor didn’t work there were no letters.

– Did the censor blot out anything?

– Sr.: Not in our letters.

– Did Yevgeniy and Andrey get a lot of letters from other cities and countries?

– Jr.: There was a day when each of them received between 40 and 60 letters. It was unbelievable. We rejoiced with the other wives over this broad support, and we talked about who had received how many.

– Sr.: Yevgeniy received 956 letters in six months. We also write letters ourselves to prisoners in other cities. We have been corresponding with some of them for years. I illustrate my letters with drawings and send cards.

– Drawings make letters even warmer. It’s good that you have an epistolary circle of solidarity, a kind of life ring. I don’t remember the last time I wrote a letter on paper.

– Jr.: We had forgotten, too; we had to refresh our memory. Letters on paper are nicer and more lively than electronic ones, just like paper books.

– The detention center is located inside the city. It is a gloomy building, with a thick cloud of violence hanging over it. I walked past it on the promenade. How many people did they put in one cell there?

– Sr.: They put all five of them in solitary confinement, which was good. They read a lot. Andrey read The Gulag Archipelago, but Yevgeniy said he wasn’t going to read about the Gulag because he was already getting his fill of prison reality.

– That’s a privilege, considering the times – no tobacco smoke, no provocateurs, and no violence. Adapting to a crowded cell would cause additional stress. How did you manage to get them out of the detention center?

– Sr.: Petitions to the ombudsmen and motions – our lawyers worked hard.

Humane Interrogation

– Was the threat of arrest also hanging over your head?

– Jr.: Yes, we were afraid they would come for us too. Our bags were packed.

– Sr.: We expected to be arrested next. Especially after the investigator said during the trial that he had cases against many of us, and the case files were just waiting for the right moment.

– Did they question you as witnesses?

– Jr.: Yes, at the Investigative Committee.

– Sr.: At the Investigative Committee the interrogation was very humane.

– What is humane interrogation, I wonder?

– Sr.: The investigator would ask a question. I would answer, “Article 51 of the Constitution.” He calmly wrote down “Article 51.” Next question. Again, Article 51. The interrogation went on in that monotonous way for about twenty minutes. We signed the protocol and went our separate ways.

– And your husbands also referred to Article 51?

– Sr.: Of course. After all, it’s in the law – we need to use it.

A janitor with computer skills

– Did you provide character references for your husbands?

– Sr.: Yes, but we gave the character references for the court. We said many good things about them.

By the way, when it was their time, both my husband and my son chose alternative service, so as not to take up arms. Yevgeniy went to court six times to fight for his right to alternative service, and he succeeded. Andrey served as a sanitary aide in a substance-abuse dispensary. By profession he is a computer operator, but after his alternative service, he chose to work as a janitor to have more free time. The judge was very surprised at this choice. But what about your career, your prestige, your success?

– That’s what dissidents did in the Soviet era: they worked as janitors, watchmen, and stokers, so as not to become part of a system that was alien to them.

– Jr.: All four of us work as janitors. It’s a family dynasty.

And in the hearing for preventive measures, I told the court that the charge of extremism was complete nonsense, that my husband Andrey is a kind, decent, responsible man. I’m proud that I am married to such a man. We need more people like him.

A brutal interrogation

– Sr.: In February 2019, people from department “E” – counteracting extremism – put me through a brutal interrogation. They threatened me, “You better tell us everything right now. Otherwise, we’ll put your husband away for 8 years; he’ll be locked up with criminals; he’ll come home a hardened criminal.”

– They know how our prisons “reform” people.

– Sr.: They were infuriated: “What Article 51 of the Constitution? You have no right to use it! Who do you think you are?”

I replied, “My husband and my son are in prison. Who is going to use Article 51 if not me,since it says that ‘no one is obliged to testify against himself, his spouse, or close relatives’?”

They threatened that both my husband and I would spend a long time in jail, that they would put both of us away for 8 years. It was a very brutal interrogation; lots of shouting.

They said, “Now we’re going to write in the interrogation protocol what we need, whether you talk or not.”

I replied, “And I won’t sign it, I’ll cross out your lies. Stop intimidating me.”

– Did anyone sign what the investigators wrote for them?

– Sr.: There were cases of that, but they were rare – after all, they summoned a lot of people in Kirov – between 50 and 70. They threatened people and interrogated them for hours; the pressure was very intense, and some couldn’t hold up under that kind of stress.

– Jr.: One elderly woman told the court how the investigators came to her house when she was feeling very ill and was waiting for an ambulance. They gave her something to sign, but during the trial she denied her own testimony. It was clear that she couldn’t even pronounce what they wrote down as her supposed statement.

– They use sick, elderly women. How despicable!

Stress like that doesn’t simply go away. Did you have health problems after that?

– Jr.: I had trouble sleeping and eating; being at home made me anxious; I felt like they were about to come and take me away.

– Did you get support from friends or relatives?

– Jr.: Yes, there was tremendous support from my fellow believers and relatives. Without them, it would have been extremely difficult to make it through such hardships.

– Sr.: I still can’t get over my internal stress and tension. Initially, for a few months, I couldn’t sleep; I kept expecting a knock on the door. The slightest noise in the entryway made me jump.

There was some relief when they released my husband and son from detention. I prayed to Jehovah that we would be given a break, so we could recoup our strength. To be together with my husband and son, so we could all take a deep breath.

– What’s happening in the trial now?

– Sr.: The defense is presenting its evidence. We hope the judge will consider it and realize that our loved ones and friends are innocent – that those in the dock are peaceful, honest, decent people who have been slandered by the investigation. It’s interesting that the trial is being held in a building where in the early 1990s we first held meetings of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It was the first building we rented in Kirov. It was in this very building that my husband Yevgeniy first attended a meeting. It was also where I used to carry little Andrushka in my arms – and twenty-five years later, they led him down the same corridor in handcuffs.

– This building is a symbol of our country, where freedom of religion has been replaced by persecution. Yesterday I stood in the courtyard of this building and looked through the window at an ongoing trial. A bright light shone from the windows of the courtroom and illuminated the winter darkness. May your loved ones have freedom! May you have strength and support!

– Sr., Jr.: Thank you!

February 8, 2022

• 1
  Andrey Suvorkov, born 1993. Articles 282.2(1), 282.3(1) of the RF CrC. Time in custody: 3 days in the TDF, 114 days in Detention Center № 1 for the Kirov Region, 193 days under house arrest. He was given a suspended sentence of 6 years and 3 months in June 2022. ↩︎
• 2
  Yevgeniy Anatolyevich Suvorkov, born 1978. Articles 282.2(1), 282.3(1) of the RF CrC: Time in custody: 3 days in the TDF, 174 days in Detention Center № 1 in the Kirov Region, 181 days under house arrest. He was given a suspended sentence of 6 years and 3 months in June 2022. ↩︎
• 3
  Criminal proceedings on charges of extremism were initiated against seven local residents, five of whom were taken into custody, including a Polish citizen, 52-year-old Andrzej Oniszczuk, who spent almost a year in detention without being able to communicate with his wife even by phone. His fellow believers spent from 2 to 11 months in custody and from 6 to 9 months under house arrest. One of the defendants, 64-year-old Yuriy Geraskov, died of a long illness a week before the court started considering the merits of the case. The investigator knew about the believer’s condition but did not terminate criminal proceedings. In January 2021, the hearings started at the Pervomayskiy District Court in Kirov. The defendants: Yevgeniy and Andrey Suvorkov, Maksim Khalturin, Vladimir Korobeynikov, Andrzej Oniszczuk, Vladimir Vasilyev, and Yuriy Geraskov (posthumously). In June 2022, the believers were given suspended sentences for terms between 2.5 to 6.5 years. Yuriy Geraskov was declared guilty of extremism, but the criminal case was dropped in connection with his death. ↩︎