The threat to seize cars for littering in Chechnya has run counter to the law.

Confiscation of property for littering is contrary to the Constitution and current legislation, but Chechen authorities are interpreting the law liberally, human rights defenders, activists, and lawyers have pointed out.

As reported by the "Caucasian Knot," Chechen Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Agriculture, and Ramzan Kadyrov's son-in-law, Viskhan Matsuev, stated that the republic's authorities will confiscate cars from those who litter inappropriately. However, the Russian Code of Administrative Offenses only provides for the confiscation of cars for such an offense from officials and legal entities.

The NiYSO movement has not yet received any reports from residents regarding the use of these threats. "And it's difficult to imagine how they plan to control this. "Most likely, the statement is of an intimidating nature, although it certainly contradicts the legislation imposed on the population," a representative of the Ansar movement told a "Caucasian Knot" correspondent.

Instead of solving the problem the right way, instilling the habit of not throwing trash at schools, improving the system of collection and
processing of waste, they prefer to do everything through brute force. They force public sector workers to go to clean-up days after work,
hire elderly women (who can barely walk) to clean the streets. They do not know how to solve problems except with such threats. Thanks to carte blanche from the FSB, such open violation of the law by representatives of the regime no longer surprises anyone. Russian laws change according to their mood. Today they need to take away their cars, tomorrow they will be sent to the SVO," he said.

Human rights activist Ruslan Kutayev* noted that He is not yet aware of any cases of cars being confiscated for littering, but in principle, the republic’s authorities could very well do so. “They could take your car away or kill you for a like or an incorrect comment. But so far I have not heard and do not have any information about anyone having their car confiscated,” he emphasized.

Lawyer Timur Filippov noted that such confiscation of cars completely contradicts Article 8.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. “Article 8.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation
(“Failure to comply with environmental and sanitary-epidemiological requirements for waste management”) does not provide for confiscation of property as a type of administrative punishment. The maximum that is possible under it is a fine in accordance with the sanction of the article,” he said.

Filippov emphasized that the article of the Code of Administrative Offenses does not provide for punishment in the form of confiscation of a car or other property. “Accordingly, the threat to “confiscate cars for littering” is legally is insignificant. Even if it comes from the ministry, it has no enforcement powers for such measures. Moreover, even confiscation as an administrative penalty (Article 3.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses) is permitted only by a court decision and only in cases expressly provided for by law. Neither Article 8.2 nor any other provision of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation contains such a sanction.

Consequently, such an “initiative” grossly violates the principles of legality and delimitation of powers established by Articles 1.1 and Article 1.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, and is contrary to the Constitution (Article 35 - the right of ownership, seizure of property is possible only by a court decision),” the lawyer noted.

He also said that since the seizure of property is a restriction of the constitutional right of ownership, then, in accordance with Part 3 of Article 55
of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, such a restriction can only be established by federal law, and not by a government decree, an order
of the ministry or an order of the head of the region. "A bylaw (of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Ministry of Agriculture, etc.) cannot introduce a new type of punishment or administrative measure unless it is provided for by federal law. A verbal order from the authorities, like this threat, is legally null and void; it is arbitrary and has no legal consequences. And citizens in this case have the right to self-defense," Filippov concluded.

* listed as a foreign agent.

** Meta (owner of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp) is banned in Russia.