By: Dim Amor

A legal drama concluded today in Moscow, when the court rejected the appeal of Dr. Nadezhda Boyanova, a 68-year-old pediatrician, thus upholding the severe sentence of 5.6 years imprisonment. Boyanova was convicted last November of "spreading false information about the Russian army", an offense enshrined in Article 207.3 of the Russian Criminal Code.

Boyanova's troubling story began in February 2024, when a criminal investigation was opened against her following a video circulated on a Telegram channel associated with the authorities. In the video, a woman named Anastasia Akinshina claimed that she had brought her seven-year-old son to visit Dr. Boyanova and told the doctor that her son was dealing with behavioral difficulties following his father's death in the Ukraine war. According to Akinshina, Boyanova told her that her husband was "a legitimate target for Ukraine" and accused Russia of aggression.

Today's appeal hearing was held behind closed doors, at the request of the prosecution which claimed "a threat to the safety of participants in the proceedings" – a claim that seems particularly puzzling given that details of the case had already been made public. Boyanova herself, who participated in the hearing via video call from the detention center where she has been imprisoned since November, protested against the decision to hold the hearing behind closed doors. "I am a pediatrician… How can I cause any harm, especially when I am behind bars? How can I threaten anyone?", asked Boyanova with understandable frustration.

Dozens of citizens gathered outside the courthouse in protest and support for the elderly doctor, but to no avail. The appeal was rejected and the original sentence remained in force.

It is worth noting that Boyanova has denied all allegations against her from the beginning of the investigation until today. "I am a doctor, I cannot say such words", she insisted. Moreover, there are significant contradictions in the testimony of the complainant, Akinshina, who at a later stage claimed that her son was not present at the meeting at all, contrary to her initial claim.

Despite the absence of conclusive evidence of the existence of the conversation in question, and based on a single testimony whose credibility is in doubt, the military court convicted Boyanova and sentenced her to a lengthy prison term. For a woman of her age, 68, the meaning of 5.6 years in Russian detention conditions is extremely harsh, and many define it as almost a death sentence.

This case joins a long line of similar arrests and convictions in Russia in recent years, especially since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine. The Russian regime implements a policy of "zero tolerance" toward any critical expression about the war or the actions of the Russian army. New laws enacted with the outbreak of the war prohibit any public discussion that questions the justice of the war or the actions of the Russian army.

The case evokes for many memories of the darkest periods of the Soviet Union, especially from the period of Stalin's rule, when denunciations and false accusations were part of everyday reality. Then, as now, denunciations were used as a tool for personal revenge or for removing political rivals. The price of a wrong word, even in a private conversation, could be long years behind bars.

The fear of expressing free opinion has become a daily reality for Russian citizens. Today, even in restaurants, concert halls, and cafes in Moscow and other cities, citizens avoid expressing critical opinions about the war in public, fearing that someone might inform on them and they would find themselves in a situation similar to that of Dr. Boyanova.

International human rights organizations have sharply criticized the legal proceedings against Boyanova, and called on the Russian authorities to release her immediately. They emphasize that this is not an isolated case, but part of a broad trend of suppressing freedom of expression and opposition to the war. However, it seems that international voices do not affect Russian internal policy.

Boyanova's family and friends fear for her physical and mental health in prison. But beyond the personal tragedy, her case provides a chilling reminder of the price that ordinary citizens pay for words that may never have been spoken, and of the oppressive atmosphere prevailing in Russia today.

As Dr. Boyanova begins to serve her heavy sentence, many Russian citizens continue to live under the shadow of fear – fear of denunciations, fear of expressing opinions, and fear of the judicial system which seems to have lost its independence and its commitment to justice. It seems that silence has become the only survival strategy for many in the country, while the price of free speech continues to rise.