Press Release, 1.08.2026

Photo: Grigory Yavlinsky testifying in court in defence of Lev Shlosberg / Photo by Pskov Yabloko

On Friday, 31 July, Grigory Yavlinsky, Chairman of Yabloko’s Federal Political Committee, testified as a defence witness in the case against Lev Shlosberg at Pskov City Court. It should be noted that hearings in the case were held daily (except at weekends) from 13 to 31 July.

In a consolidated criminal case, Lev Shlosberg is charged under two articles of the Criminal Code: Article 280.3(1) of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (repeat “discrediting the army”), over a debate with historian Yuri Pivovarov in which Shlosberg argued for an urgent ceasefire, and Article 207.3(2) (spreading “fakes about the army”), over the repost of a Telegram channel post made in February 2022.

At the hearing on 31 July, the court examined Grigory Yavlinsky as a defence witness. He said that he had known Lev Shlosberg for more than thirty years, and that this was not merely an acquaintance but many years of joint political work founded on shared values:

“Lev Shlosberg is one of the authors of important platform documents of the Yabloko party. Before he was placed under house arrest, and subsequently in a pre-trial detention facility, we worked together fruitfully.”

On Lev Shlosberg’s political stance:

“Lev Shlosberg is a humanist. He is a politician whose work is fundamentally about preserving people’s lives and respecting the dignity of the individual, the dignity of every person. Lev Shlosberg categorically rejects violence as an instrument of politics and consistently advocates resolving any political conflicts at the negotiating table.

Lev Shlosberg is firmly convinced that politics is the art of reaching agreement, not of waging war. Lev Shlosberg consistently advocates the peaceful resolution of any conflicts, because he considers the preservation of life to be the highest value. This is a matter of principle for him, from which he has never wavered.”

On how Lev Shlosberg treats people who hold different political views and convictions:

“Lev Shlosberg always remains within the bounds of respectful discussion, even when he categorically disagrees with his opponents. He seeks to persuade people, not to insult or humiliate them. Lev Shlosberg has an important quality – being firm and persistent, and tactful at the same time, combining principle with humanity, with compassion.”

On the incompatibility of Lev Shlosberg’s position with aggression, political hatred and enmity:

“Throughout his time working in the party, there has not been a single instance of Lev Shlosberg displaying any form of hatred or enmity, including political hatred. Lev Shlosberg is opposed to dehumanisation, and hatred and enmity always cause pain to people and destroy the possibility of dialogue, of understanding the causes of a conflict and the ways to resolve it <…>

Lev Shlosberg is an advocate of political dialogue. Political dialogue, the search for common ground and compromise, is his fundamental approach. Dialogue and the working out of compromises are impossible in an atmosphere of hatred and enmity. That is why ideological hatred or enmity towards anyone is not characteristic of Lev Shlosberg.”

On what kind of person Lev Shlosberg is:

“Lev Shlosberg is an intellectual, an honest and principled person. He is an energetic and active person. He is a patriot of Russia.

One of the important features of his character is that Lev Shlosberg is sensitive to people, to their troubles and joys. He feels people’s pain as his own.

Lev Shlosberg has a good family. A wonderful, kind wife, Zhanna. His father, Mark Naumovich Shlosberg, who turned 97 this year. I know that Lev Shlosberg shows enormous respect for people, especially for the older generation. Respect for people is an inner, personal need of his <…>

I would like to underline several points. Lev Shlosberg is a person who has always voluntarily and consciously observed the laws in force. He has been in our party for more than thirty years. And, as a figure and as a person, he has always been someone who paid attention, above all, to observing the law. For me, this was very important.”

It should be noted, the chronology of hearings in the case against Lev Shlosberg since 13 July is as follows:

At previous hearings, Lev Shlosberg had sought the recusal of the judge and of the prosecution, and then, after this was refused, the prosecution proceeded to examine the evidence (which included wiretap recordings). The court then heard prosecution witnesses – participants in the nationalistic “Russian Marches” and members of the so-called Pskov Territorial Defence Force. After that, the court heard a fourth witness, an informer, and the prosecution concluded its presentation of evidence.

At the hearings on 21 and 22 July, the court rejected all motions filed by Lev Shlosberg’s defence, after which a linguistics expert witness “demolished” the prosecution’s expert assessment. At the hearings on 23 and 24 July, Lev Shlosberg’s defence filed a motion to exclude inadmissible prosecution evidence and continued to present evidence of the politician’s innocence; the court then examined Yabloko Chairman Nikolai Rybakov as a defence witness. Also on 24 July, historian Konstantin Obozny testified in Shlosberg’s defence, and on 27 July, journalist and media manager Alexei Venediktov did likewise. On 28 July, Shlosberg’s lawyers again sought the recusal of the judge, and on 29 July, journalist Arina Borodina testified in the politician’s defence.