Moscow courts have launched a criminal hearing against a TV Dozhd editor for stating that Russia occupies 20 percent of Georgian territory.
The Kremlin’s crackdown on independent media reached a new level this week. The Tagansky District Court in Moscow began hearing a criminal case against Valeria Kichigina. She is an editor at the independent TV channel Dozhd. Her alleged crime involves a social media post marking the anniversary of the 2008 war and a repost about the tragedy in Bucha.
Authorities have charged her in absentia. If convicted, she faces up to ten years in a Russian penal colony. The case highlights how the Russian state continues to pursue journalists long after they have fled the country.
A Post That Sparked a Manhunt
The charges stem from two specific instances of online activity. The primary focus of the prosecution is an Instagram story Kichigina posted in 2023. This post marked the 15th anniversary of the August 2008 Russo-Georgian War. In it, she simply wrote a widely accepted fact: “20% of Georgia is occupied by Russia.”
Investigators claim this statement is false. They argue it undermines the state. The second charge relates to a repost of an article discussing the killings in Bucha, Ukraine. The Kremlin has consistently denied involvement in Bucha despite overwhelming international evidence.
According to case files, police claim these posts caused “feelings of anxiety, fear, concern, and insecurity” among citizens who read them.
The timeline of the prosecution reveals a calculated effort to build a case over time:
- 2023: Investigators in Ufa discover the Instagram post.
- November 2024: A criminal case is formally opened.
- January 2025: Police raid the journalist’s family home in Russia.
- March 2025: Kichigina is arrested in absentia and placed on a wanted list.
- January 2026: The trial begins at Moscow’s Tagansky District Court.
This pattern is familiar to many Russian journalists. Authorities often wait for months or years to bring charges. They use these dormant cases to exert pressure on reporters working in exile.
The Connection to Bashkortostan Protests
Kichigina believes the charges are not really about a history post. She says the prosecution is revenge for her work covering regional politics. Before joining TV Dozhd, she worked in Ufa. This is the capital of the Bashkortostan region.
Her recent reporting has focused heavily on the “Baymak case.” This refers to the massive protests that erupted in Bashkortostan in early 2024. Thousands gathered to support local activist Fail Alsynov. It was one of the largest displays of public dissent in Russia since the invasion of Ukraine began.
The Russian government is sensitive to unrest in ethnic republics.
By targeting Kichigina, authorities send a message to other regional journalists. They want to show that leaving Russia does not guarantee safety from legal harassment.
The investigation against her started in Ufa. This local connection strongly suggests that her coverage of the Bashkortostan crackdown is the true motive. The “fake news” charges regarding the army are simply the most convenient legal tool to use against her.
Censorship Laws Weaponized
Since February 2022, Russia has introduced strict censorship laws. These laws make it a crime to spread “knowingly false information” about the military. In practice, this means any information that contradicts the official Defense Ministry briefings is illegal.
Journalists cannot call the conflict a “war.” They cannot discuss civilian casualties. They cannot mention the occupation of territories unless they frame it as “liberation.”
Here is how the legal trap works for journalists like Kichigina:
- Surveillance: Security services monitor social media accounts of exiled reporters.
- Discovery: They find a post that contradicts the Kremlin narrative.
- Expert Analysis: State-aligned experts testify that the post causes “harm” or “anxiety” to the public.
- Charges: Prosecutors file charges under Article 207.3 of the Criminal Code.
The claim that Kichigina’s post caused “insecurity toward the state” is a key part of the strategy. It reframes political speech as a psychological attack on the Russian people. This allows the courts to hand down harsh sentences for simple text posts.
The Reality of the Occupation
The specific statement Kichigina is on trial for is a matter of international consensus. The phrase “20% of Georgia is occupied by Russia” refers to the regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
Following the 2008 war, Russia recognized these regions as independent states. However, almost all other nations consider them sovereign Georgian territory under Russian military occupation. Russian troops maintain bases there. They control the borders.
Moscow denies the term “occupation,” referring to its presence as “peacekeeping.”
The table below breaks down the differing narratives that landed the editor in court:
| Feature | International View | Kremlin Narrative |
|---|---|---|
| Status of Abkhazia | Georgian territory under occupation | Independent state |
| Status of S. Ossetia | Georgian territory under occupation | Independent state |
| Military Presence | Illegal occupation forces | Peacekeeping contingent |
| 2008 War Origin | Russian aggression | Georgian aggression |
Kichigina stating the international view is a crime in Russia. This trial proves that historical debates are now matters of criminal law. The state demands total adherence to its version of history.
Journalists at TV Dozhd have faced relentless pressure. The channel was forced to shut down in Russia in 2022. It relocated to Europe to continue broadcasting. Yet, the reach of Russian law enforcement continues to disrupt their lives. Family members back home often face searches and intimidation.
The outcome of this trial is almost certainly a guilty verdict. Convictions in absentia have become a routine administrative process in Moscow courts. The goal is not to imprison the journalist immediately, as she is out of reach. The goal is to isolate her. It prevents her from ever returning home and brands her a criminal in the eyes of the Russian public.
This case serves as a grim reminder. In modern Russia, typing a statistic about a war that happened 15 years ago can cost you a decade of freedom. It is a war on memory as much as it is a war on dissent.
