Sunflower fields, village houses with platbands, more solid brick houses. Clothes are dried on the ropes, chickens run right along the road, an old dog warms the stomach in the sun. The village of Klekotki in the Skopinsky district of the Ryazan region looks the same as thousands of other small settlements in central Russia. Only a high blank fence almost in the center of the village attracts attention. Here is the IR-5 high security. Only the “first movers” are serving their sentences - those who are first sentenced to imprisonment.

We go through the checkpoint, past the “Boards of Honor” traditional for the colonies: here every month photos of prisoners who actively participate in public life are posted - contests, festivals, sports and cultural events.

Nikita Belykh is also on this board, right in the center. They explain to me that he is not the first time to be among the positively distinguished. He has no penalties, but, once in a colony, he developed violent activity here, which, however, cannot surprise anyone who knew him before.

While I'm waiting for my interlocutor in the office of the head of the colony, I'm a little nervous. We have known each other for many years from his past and even the year before last activities. Most of all I am afraid to see a broken man who dropped his hands and who no longer needs anything.

The door opens. On the threshold - a very tall man in a black prison robe. He smiles and greets me.

Nikita Yuryevich Belykh - ex-governor of the Kirov region (2009—2016) and ex-leader of the Union of Right Forces Party (2005-2008).

Belykh was detained in the summer of 2016 in Moscow while receiving € 150 thousand from a German citizen Yuri Sudgeimer, a member of the board of directors of the Novovyatsky ski complex. There was also a bottle of wine in the holiday package. The governor was accused of receiving a bribe of € 400 thousand (according to investigators, the last part of the total amount was transferred at the meeting). White did not plead guilty. Belykh called the request for money recorded on the Sudgeimer recorder not extortion of a bribe, but collection of extra-budgetary financing for the needs of the city. And the package that the governor took from Sudheimer a few minutes before the arrest, he said, he considered a regular birthday present.

In February 2018, Belykh was sentenced to eight years in prison in a maximum security colony.

  • Nikita Belykh was sentenced to eight years in prison and a fine of almost 48 million rubles
  • RIA News
  • © Maxim Blinov


- Nikita Yurevich, you do not look depressed.

- I'm not depressed. I like working as a librarian. And I like it not only and not so much from the point of view of access to literature, there have never been any problems with this, but from the point of view of the possibility, we will say so, to test some of our ideas in practice - in particular, regarding working with specific contingent. I like to do it.

- Tell me more, please, what exactly are you doing here?

- It turns out that for a little more than a year I have been working as a librarian. I prepare reports every month. I myself initiated this internal bureaucracy. Since, in my opinion, it disciplines in a certain sense, it is also useful for the administration of the institution. According to books, library funds, we have grown one and a half times. I set myself the task, so that we have the occupancy as required by European standards - these are 10 books on the convict. When I got here, it was a little less than seven thousand. In the near future we will approach the figure of 10 thousand books. And there should be about 12 thousand in the fund.

- Is it interesting here?

- The number of library readers has increased from 460 to 800, which is about 70% of those convicted here. Actually, I think that by this indicator we are probably one of the best in Russia. We have opened a department of periodical literature. I personally write out about 30 publications. We do the binder. Twice a week, I broadcast the Press Review.

- Are you also a radio host?

- Yes. All materials related to the activities of the courts, the FSIN system itself, law enforcement agencies, the human rights community, and the lawyer community are all covered in the framework of the program, which is published twice a week, on Mondays and Thursdays. The “One Day in History” program is released daily. After the morning verification, we tell the convicts what happened on that day in world history. A ten minute transmission is obtained. I record twice a week, several days in advance.

- What other projects are there?

- We have citizens of 15 states here, that is, almost all the former union republics, with some exceptions. Plus Nigeria, China. We turned to the embassies of these countries in Russia with a proposal to send literature (although there is a limitation - it should be in Russian). Not all embassies responded. But still, the embassies of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Azerbaijan sent generally quite interesting literature: books by national writers and poets, books on the history of the state. We hold reader conferences. Familiar with the work of writers. Now we are getting acquainted with the work of Gogol. Before that there was Gumilyov, before that Akhmatova.

- Do you go alphabetically?

- I tried to arrange in chronological order, that is, based on birthdays. Then it turned out that our writers were born extremely unevenly in months ... In December, they announced a literary contest. They suggested that the convicted write an essay that Sergei Shargunov evaluated (writer and State Duma deputy. - RT) . He came, we agreed. He made a small analysis, noted the best works, awarded people ... We regularly conduct art and literary contests. We hold dictations, intellectual quizzes ... I always celebrated the State Flag Day (celebrated on August 22 - RT ), that is, for me this holiday is quite close. We sewed a cloth, five by seven square meters. There will be a solemn meeting, the banner of this one.

  • Patch on the robe of prisoner Nikita Belykh
  • © RT

- The rally authorized?

- Here we have everything authorized. And we recently opened the “Memorial of Peoples” - granite stone with a metal plate on which the word “Memory” is written in 15 languages ​​...

- Do people need this?

- It seems to me that one of the problems of the penitentiary system is that, out of habit (and since it’s easier), it tries to lead everything to a common denominator. I always proceeded from the fact that any development in society provides, let us say so, a progressive minority. That is, those who really want something. Therefore, if in our colony, where about 1200 people are kept, 100 or 200 want to develop, then they need to create an opportunity for this. Do not bring them to the same state in which all the others who really want nothing and whose whole life is to sit from bell to bell and shouting AUE ("the prison structure is one," is considered the motto of an informal association in youth environment. - RT ) go free.

- According to the "people's" 228th article, is there a lot of sitting here?

- Yes, about 37% are convicted here under articles related to drug trafficking. Next come the 105th (murder. - RT ), 111th (intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm. - RT ), but they already make up a much smaller proportion.

- What is wrong with the application of the 228th? On the one hand, we have the case of Golunov, who almost sat down for 15 years as a "famous drug lord", and then it turned out that the drugs had thrown him. On the other hand, for example, our correspondent traveled to Izhevsk and talked with real mortgages, couriers who could get off with a slightly less serious period than 15 years.

- We have a lot of things out of balance. Firstly, we need to look very seriously at issues related to the legislation itself and issues related to the application of this legislation. These, as we understand it, are different things. This is the topic of the now fashionable concept of decriminalization of some compositions. Indeed, often people, whom you certainly cannot call drug lords, according to formal criteria and formal attributes, successfully “leave” according to article 228 to places not so remote. Now I’m not ready to discuss whether it is necessary to liberalize anti-drug legislation, as is the case in several European countries and in individual US states where marijuana and other drugs are legalized. But it is necessary to seriously review the compositions themselves - this, in fact, does not contradict the statement that the president made during the direct line.

- And on enforcement?

- Actually, that example with Golunov clearly shows that for a number of structures the 228th article is iron, as they say, a tried and tested method for solving completely different problems. Questions automatically arise related to the independence of the judiciary, with how much the courts are ready to listen to a different position than that of the investigator and prosecutor.

- Which article of the Criminal Code would you humanize?

- It seems to me that we should not focus on the topic, which specific article should be decriminalized. It is necessary to understand the approaches in the criminal executive legislation in general, as well as with the application of amnesty. Here, I’m just inclined to support the positions expressed by Andrei Babushkin (member of the Presidential Council for Human Rights. - RT ), Pavel Krasheninnikov (head of the State Duma committee on state building and legislation. - RT ): the practice that has developed now leads to that during amnesties the same circle of people is always freed, according to the same compositions. Well then decriminalize these compounds. Otherwise, relatively speaking, people are first massively imprisoned for certain articles, and then massly released under the same articles. I also like the approach that Granny suggested: to encourage the repayment of civil lawsuits and fines. And apply amnesty in relation to those who, in the literal sense of the word, paid the damages. At least somehow additionally motivate people to resolve these civil issues as soon as possible.

- I see that you were and remain a liberal by conviction.

- Yes. I have not changed my beliefs and do not change, of course.

- What is your motivation for this diverse activity in the colony?

- I spent two years in an isolation ward where you can’t do anything at all, so, as they said in the late Soviet era, I damned wanted to work (the catch phrase “Damn you want to work!” Appeared after Yegor Ligachev’s speech at the plenum of the CPSU Central Committee in 1990. - RT ). I had a great desire to just do something. I told the colony leadership: if you say working on a “sewing machine” or in a subsidiary farm, I’m ready. But as a librarian, I can really do more and better than in any other field. The administration agreed with this approach.

- How much does being in prison change a person? What has changed in your personality?

- It all depends on the person. I proceed from the fact that if a person really did something and he likes to do it, then changing the familiar environment should not break him.

- Does power change a person?

- Maybe yes. You ask if the prison cheated on me. In my beliefs - I have not changed. But naturally it has some kind of influence. So is the power. That is, from the point of view of my values, principles and so on - no, I have not changed. She postponed some imprint in some other qualities? Surely. But it is better for others to evaluate it.

- Do not regret that you went to power, that you accepted at one time an offer to become governor?

- I do not regret it. I think this was the right approach. Maybe he turned out to be so unfavorable for me. But I am convinced that as part of my work, I have done a lot of necessary and useful for people, for the region. Letters of thanks come to me for what has been done. And it reassures me. If you remember, coming to power in 2008 was largely unpersonalized. There was a question: are representatives of other political views able to engage in public administration?

- The ability to integrate without losing yourself?

- Of course. My task, in fact, was just to prove that yes, it is possible. And you can, as they say, change yourself without changing yourself.

- Do you still think that people who do not hold pro-government views should go to work in the system?

- I believe that representatives of different views, supporters of different political ideas should go to power. Therefore, I have always been an opponent of the boycott of the elections. If you are not comfortable with the situation, if you think that it is necessary in a different way - well, prove it, convince, work, try to do something yourself to change it. And if you are not comfortable, but you do not want to change anything, this approach is completely destructive. Then you need to collect, as they say, manat and go to where you are more comfortable ...

When in 2008 I received such an offer (to become the governor of the Kirov region. - RT ), I talked with many people and consulted. Yes, there were those who said: no, you can’t have anything in common with this power. Nevertheless, others answered that yes, there are many claims to power, but we must try to change it, including from the inside. I hold the same point of view.

  • The detention of Nikita Belykh in June 2016
  • RIA News
  • © RF IC

- Do you think that we still have a chance to go through evolution, but without revolution? Because society is very polarized now.

- Yes, it is very polarized. It bothers me. Unfortunately, in isolation, one of the problems is that access to information is very limited ... I, as they say, feel the tension that exists on my fingertips, but to diagnose it clearly, some suggest my own options, if someone asks, I can’t.

- There is now a fashionable word “lustration”. Are you for lustration or against?

- I remember the discussion of lustration in the 1990s. That's when I was for her. Now I am not ready to express my opinion. I'm afraid that practically everything and everyone, the whole country will have to be lustrated - it has changed so much. The lustration, which was discussed at the level of Boris Nikolaevich Yeltsin, in the 1990s, in my opinion, was appropriate. But the country's leadership took a different path. And it's hard to say whether it was right or not. There are a lot of arguments for, and there are a large number of arguments against.

- We talked about the future. When you are free, do you plan to stay or leave?

- I proceed from the fact that I will definitely do something. That is, the option that I freed myself and went on a well-deserved rest, with a fishing rod on the river, to write memoirs - there is no such option. I will definitely work where I will be most useful and effective. In Russia - I will be very happy about this. If my competencies, as it is now fashionable to say, will not be in demand in Russia, which I would not really like, then I will look for where they will be in demand.

- You have no desire to take revenge on those people whom you called guilty of your criminal prosecution?

- “Revenge” is probably not the right word. Revenge, as it were, involves some sort of reconciliation of personal accounts. Do I want them to be punished? Yes I want to. But I do not want vendettas. I want the actions of the people who contributed to or initiated my stay here to be given an objective legal public assessment.

“Do you hope that one day your case will be reviewed?”

“I have no doubt that this will happen.” The question is what we put in the concept of a review of a case. I assume that justice - in such a global context - will triumph sooner or later. And, as they say, the history of the dot over the "i" will dot. Of course, I would like this to happen as soon as possible and in the most understandable, simple format.

- What is more important for you: law or justice?

- Good question. Now, probably, justice, yes.

- And before - the law?

- Still, all my life I somehow functioned within the framework of the law. And I proceeded from the fact that if the laws do not correspond to reality and the concepts of justice, they must be changed. To go out with legislative initiatives, to propose something. This, in fact, just fell under the theory of small affairs.

- The theory of small affairs is criticized a lot from both sides ...

- Yes. But, on the other hand, you know, there is a famous story about a Columbus egg. Columbus was much criticized for the fact that he was swimming there and doing the wrong thing. He suggested putting his opponents an egg on the sharp end. Everyone tried to do it, but no one could. And he took it, just broke the egg and put it. They say: no, it's not fair. He says: everyone spoke, and I did it. That's all. It is good to criticize small business theories when you yourself did not participate in anything and did not stain your pens.

- How much has your social circle changed? Friends, some public people turned away?

- Among those whom I considered friends, there were losses, yes. There were also very painful for me. But this is literally one or two. Of those with whom I spoke, someone continues to maintain relationships with me, someone does not, but sends greetings and, as it is customary to say in certain circles, sends out rays of support. Someone just what is called hid. Complicated. And most importantly, it is very difficult in this situation to evaluate people. Because you don’t know what they had to face, what consequences could have arisen for them if some kind of good relationship appeared. I would least like anyone to suffer from this. Let’s say so, after all, the bulk of those whom I considered friends and whose support, primarily moral support, I counted on, remained such. And we'll talk to the rest later.

- Do you keep relations with Navalny? Does he support you?

- You see, we stopped communicating with Alexei Navalny in 2010. And, in fact, the paradox lies in the fact that there was some kind of loop of various situations, claims, and so on, that accompanied me for a rather long time - both before the moment of my arrest and after. But in reality, Alexey and I actually finished our communication in 2010. For reasons completely, I would say, ideological in nature. We have been friends and communicated quite tightly since 2005, when there were joint projects of SPS and Yabloko. Then, in 2008, he also moved to Kirov and worked there for a year, as a matter of fact, as an adviser (to the governor of Belykh. - RT ). I also consider that period as useful, not uninteresting. But at some point in 2010 it became clear that we have different views on work, on life. If on many, we will say so, questions of a diagnostic nature, on the state of society, we coincided, then we have different approaches to what to do with this. I was integrated into the system of state power and tried to do something. He considered another option for the development of events more correct, effective and useful. This is from the series “They Don't Argue about Tastes”. It will not be possible to evaluate who was right, who was to blame. I think that the main judge will be the story. When this happens, it's hard to say.

- Which of the current socio-political figures do you most like right now?

- Do you mean the opposition?

“No, not necessarily.” Generally any.

- When there was a year and a half or two years ago the arrival of new young and not very young technocrats (and not very technocrats) in power, among them there were people with whom I had a good personal relationship. For example, this is a series of new governors or acting governors. I would really like them to do what they plan to do. Naturally, there are people in the camp of the opposition. A certain new generation has already formed there. There are new faces that I don’t know. We met in this environment in 2005-2006. It is clear that I try to follow those people whom I personally know. Not so much because I support their views and beliefs, but because I know them: Ilya Yashin, Dima Gudkov ...

- Shargunov mentioned?

- Yes, Sergey Shargunov, he came here ... I follow their activities, without placing or giving them any ratings there, much less without sticking any labels. Again, due to the fact that I do not have enough information. But I wonder what they do.

- Did you encounter Kiriyenko when you were still a governor? Or maybe in ATP?

- If you remember, the Union of Right Forces was formed initially as an electoral bloc of several political parties and movements. One of them was the “New Force”, which was headed by Sergei Vladilenovich Kiriyenko. And I just started my path into politics as a member of the New Force. I joined it in 1999 - it is, we will say so, under a certain influence of my attitude towards Sergei Vladilenovich. At first, in the “Union of Right Forces” the former “novosiltsy”, the former “Democratic Choice of Russia”, the former “Young Russia” were kept for a long time by “factions”. Then all this, of course, was mixed and integrated. But on the whole, I ranked myself as one of the category of people who came to politics precisely in the framework of the process that Sergey Vladilenovich Kirienko began. Then, at work, we did not encounter him.

- So you liked him as such an active manager?

- I liked him as a person who, perhaps not of his own free will and desire, had to take responsibility for serious problems in the country's economy. And who, having become a kind of lightning rod, concentrating on himself, so to speak, negative, was dismissed, but at the same time did not lose his drive, life principles and convictions, he continued his work in those formats in which at that time it was possible and correct. And in the format of the State Duma - when the "Union of Right Forces" was in parliament, and in the format of the plenipotentiary of the president in the Volga Federal District. Then at Rosatom. Now - in the presidential administration.

- There is a concept that democracy is the power of democrats. That is, when people in power with the right people, beliefs and so on are in power. And there is a second concept: even if people come to power with completely different beliefs alien to you (say, communists), but this happens as a result of democratic procedures, this is democracy. Which concept is closer to you?

- For me, of course, the concept of institutions. Because the power of democrats is, you know, the same as the idea of ​​an enlightened monarch: the main thing is that the right monarch should be at the head of the kingdom, empire - and then everything will be fine there. Democracy is, first and foremost, independent courts, free media, fair elections, unconditional recognition of private property. That is, in fact, what is commonly called European values. Who as a result of the functioning of these institutions will be in power is not important. The very system of these institutions is a guarantee that the wrong actions of the authorities will be corrected by civil society as a result of elections, as a result of the actions of the independent press, the rule of law, whatever. History, unfortunately, really knows many examples when, as a result of honest democratic procedures, such people came to power ...

- Thugs.

- Yes, scumbags. Nobody argues that Hitler himself came to power in a completely democratic way. Another thing is that after some time the institutes ordered to live there for a long time. Such examples can be found in our neighboring countries, and in modern history, earlier. Therefore, the main thing is the creation of such institutions and conditions under which these institutions will function and be safe.

“Well, that is, even if it’s not the“ bright ”Hillary who comes, but the“ terrible ”Trump ...

- Yes.We are well aware that institutions can be different. There is China, to which we are now, so to speak, strongly oriented. It also has its own institutions - the CPC Central Committee (Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party. - RT ) and others. Somewhere it's the Senate, Congress, and so on. Most importantly, these institutions allow you to restrain the influence of one particular person - so that it does not happen that the fate of the state or the world as a whole depends on the mood or well-being of one person.

- How do you feel about President Vladimir Putin?

- Vladimir Putin is the popularly elected president of our country. No matter how I relate to him (I do not give any assessment in this case), I have no doubt about his legitimacy.

- They thought to ask for clemency?

- You see, a pardon purely legally implies that a person repents of his deed. If there was a format in which the president could have mercy on his own decision ... But to me, who was proving his innocence and was going to prove it in the future, say: “Well, they forgot, it's to blame”, and keeping your fingers crossed ... It’s wrong .

- You mentioned that Russian Flag Day is coming soon. Our country has had different flags in history, which are still popular among different groups: this is a white-yellow-black “Empire”, the Soviet flag, and tricolor. Why is your flag a tricolor?

- I graduated from school in 1991, entered the university, and began my adult life. I identify myself with the processes that took place in the country. This is quite personal for me. The Russian tricolor, a symbol of freedom and a new democratic Russia, is a symbol of my formation.

To gallery page