Press Release, 10.11.2026

Photo: Lev Shlosberg / Photo by Pskov Yabloko

Today, 10 November, the Pskov Regional Court has continued hearing the appeals filed by Yabloko Deputy Chairman Lev Shlosberg and his lawyers against the sentence in the consolidated criminal case. The case is being heard by the Judicial Panel for Criminal Cases.

It should be noted that on 17 August, a judge of the Pskov City Court found Lev Shlosberg, Yabloko Deputy Chairman, guilty of repeatedly “discrediting the use of the Russian Armed Forces” over his debate with historian Yuri Pivovarov, in which Shlosberg had argued for the need for a ceasefire as soon as possible. The judge also found him guilty of disseminating false information about the Russian Armed Forces motivated by political hatred, over a repost of a Daily Mirror front page on his Telegram channel. The repost had been made in February 2022, before the relevant article had been introduced into the Criminal Code.

Shlosberg was sentenced to 11 years and 1 month in a general regime penal colony.

The appeals against the sentence were filed by three defence lawyers: Vladimir Danilov, Vera Kovalchuk and Leila Abdullayeva. In total, the defence cited more than 20 grounds for overturning the politician’s sentence.

The first appeal hearing in Lev Shlosberg’s case took place on 29 October, and the second on 6 November.

The third hearing at the Pskov Regional Court, on 10 November, began with the court’s refusal to grant the defence’s motions for a comprehensive psychological and political science expert examination and for evidence of Lev Shlosberg’s innocence to be obtained.

It should be noted that in the court of first instance, the only evidence that Lev Shlosberg’s posts had been allegedly motivated by political hatred was a political science opinion by Darya Vasilyeva, an expert at the Kostroma Forensic Science Laboratory of the Russian Ministry of Justice.

Assessing Vasilyeva’s opinion in court, Doctor of Political Sciences Dmitry Goncharov said that the expert had not applied any scientific methods and had in fact conducted no scientific research, and that her conclusions had simply been made up.

The motive of political hatred constitutes a separate, more serious offence under the article on “fakes”. This allowed the prosecution to ask the court to remand Lev Shlosberg in custody and to seek an eight-year prison term for him on the second count of the consolidated case.

The prosecution objected to the comprehensive expert examination, arguing that the court of first instance had already considered the motion and rejected it.

After conferring in the courtroom, the appeal panel refused to order the examination.

Two other defence motions were rejected in the same way:

• a motion to obtain information from OOO VK (operating the VK social network) and MTS mobile operator, which would have established reliably who had uploaded the video of the debate between Lev Shlosberg and Yuri Pivovarov to the Odnoklassniki network, and from which device;
• a motion to request information from the regional departments of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Federal Security Service (FSB) about the SORM software systems. These are systems that help law enforcement agencies intercept, collect, store and provide access to data about users and their traffic.

Only the court could request this information.

The court then announced a break and, on returning, moved on to the closing arguments.

Lev Shlosberg asked the court to give him time to prepare and the opportunity to meet his defence lawyers at the pre-trial detention facility. He also reminded the court once again that he wished to take part in the hearing in person rather than via video link:

“Since this is a crucial part of the appeal hearing, and in order to put everything into a single speech, I ask the court to allow me to take part in the hearing in person at the stage of closing arguments. This is necessary because of the particular nature of speaking during closing arguments. It is extremely uncomfortable for me to communicate with the court through a monitor during closing arguments, at the stage of motions and at the stage of responses. There are certain basic conditions of human communication in which direct contact is essential and affects perception.”

Lawyers Vladimir Danilov and Vera Kovalchuk asked the court to take into account their commitments in other trials. They also asked for time for a confidential meeting with their client at the pre-trial detention facility. The court announced a 15-minute break.

Lev Shlosberg addressed those present in the courtroom: “I can’t see you behind the monitor, but I know you are there. Many of you write letters to me. I am grateful to you for these letters and for your support. For supporting my family — this is very important. Thank you for coming to the hearings and for showing that this matters to you and that it matters to society. I am very grateful to you for spending the time of your lives on these court hearings. Thank you very much!”

After the break, the presiding judge announced that the hearing would continue on 11 November at 14:00.

Today the Pskov Yabloko press service published Lev Shlosberg’s detailed response to the prosecution’s objections, which “do not refute a single argument in the appeals”. It should also be noted that on 6 November, the second day of the hearing of the appeals by Lev Shlosberg and his lawyers at the Pskov Regional Court, the prosecution presented its objections. The politician then prepared a detailed response to them.

Read more details here.