Press Release, 10.10.2025

Photo: Lev Shlosberg / Photo by the Pskov branch of Yabloko

Yabloko party Deputy Chairman must return to house arrest. This decision was made today, 10 October, by the Pskov Regional Court. He granted the public prosecutor’s protest, which challenged the ruling of the first instance judge who had changed the politician’s preventive measure to a “ban on certain actions”.

It should be noted that the court refused to extend Lev Shlosberg’s house arrest on Tuesday, 7 October, and the order came into force on 8 October. From this day, the politician was able to walk without restriction, work in the office and freely communicate in person with friends and party supporters. Taking into account the court’s decision made on Friday, Lev Shlosberg spent three days “at liberty”.

“The court of first instance referred to the fact that the accused cannot influence the course of the investigation <…> However, such grounds are not grounds for changing the preventive measure,” public prosecutor stated in court today, demanding that the politician’s house arrest be extended until 8 December. A second prosecutor added that previously when extending the preventive measure (the politician has been under house arrest since 11 June), the court mandatorily took into account administrative protocols that preceded the criminal charge, but on 7 October for some reason did not.

Lev Shlosberg speaking in court today said (quoted from the Kromnash Telegram channel): “No person can be found guilty of an uncommitted crime. We have a presumption of innocence. I have not been found guilty of any crime by any court decision <…>

I note that the appeal mentions Article 97 <…> The public prosecutor must state grounds based on one of the grounds in this article:

1. It is applied if the accused may abscond from the preliminary investigation and court. I am not absconding from the investigation and court. I have attended all court hearings, I have made no attempt to abscond. I do not intend to abscond from the investigation; I said this publicly in court. If for the public prosecutor’s office, a word spoken in court is not important, then this surprises me.
2. The second ground within the meaning of Article 97 is that the person being tried previously engaged in criminal activity. I have not engaged in criminal activity. The public prosecutor’s attempt to substitute “unlawful actions” for “criminal” is not provided for by the Criminal Procedure Code.
3. If the defendant may destroy evidence or threaten witnesses. There are no witnesses in this case, I cannot threaten them and cannot destroy evidence within this case, and also cannot exert any influence on any expert examinations currently taking place within the investigation.

Our basic position is that all the grounds provided for by Article 97 of the Criminal Procedure Code are absent in this case. The list of grounds is closed; it is impossible to invent new ones. Meanwhile, they are not specified in the appeal.”

It should be noted that the criminal case for repeated “discrediting of the army” against Lev Shlosberg was opened due to a debate with historian Yury Pivovarov, in which the politician defended the position of the need for the earliest possible ceasefire. On 11 June he was placed under house arrest, under which he remained for four months.

Lev Shlosberg is prohibited from using any means of communication, but we have a special form so that Yabloko members can write words of support to his wife Zhanna and father Mark Naumovich.