In the evening of January, 7th the executive committee of public movement “Adyghe Khasa” of Adygeya had voted for addressing for consideration of the council of the organization a submission of the claim to court on the fact of interdiction on carrying out of “Adyghe Djegu” on the New Year's eve in Maykop. Simultaneously the executive committee of Khasa supported the address concerned the incident to the Adygeya president Aslan Tkhakushinov. And the main thing from the two decisions was the submission to court.
All the members of the executive committee demonstrated their unanimity at voting. Though before adoption of that decision there were several various offers how they should act. Two ones were the named above adopted to execution, besides others meant criticism of the actions of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in the mass-media, appeal to Euro-Parliament and execution of all the listed measures simultaneously.
But before to give find expression for reasonings for the event, let’s try to characterize the phenomenon - interdiction of Adyghe Djegu. What is it, this phenomenon? First, what seems to be the answer it was the silliest decision, the second thing - astonishingly illegal.
Then we wonder: if the phenomenon was "silliest", then, probably, it was unreasoned. However let’s remember: during the moment of celebrating the Day of Republic in Maykop on the last day of the international festival “Asterisks of Adygeya” there had already been such action.
That means that the dispersal could be unplanned action. The other question is that, nevertheless, the characteristic "silliest" remains without change. It often happens so that an action like the named seemed to be pondered, but still remained silly.
And one more important detail which could not be overlooked. Both in the first, and in the second case the action had been directed not against Adyghe Djegu, as it was, and, most likely, against the repatriates. The circumstance that in both cases the attempt to organize a circle was undertaken by them, and there was practically no participation of the local Adygs.
Now, as far as all of us considered that, we could be asked a question why the action was "silliest", "thought over", and the main thing, “astonishingly illegal”? It seems that nobody should be surprised. If the national public (and in general any democratic movement) uses the actions which are exclusively not beyond the law then what should the authority oppose them? Only rudeness, hooliganism which adjoins gangsterism.
But the effect from such actions of the authorities, despite of all our definitions, appears to be direct and most "necessary". Even because that the conflict gets an interpersonal character at once. The concrete employee of militia - it is obligatory – belongs to the indigenous nationality, chosen by his chiefs “for carrying out of the operation” for his strictly individual qualities, becomes the foe of the concrete repatriate.
And, being, say, a national leader, no matter what you could do then, trying to help such repatriate, you harm him, first of all. Whatever it be a claim in court, an open letter to the Europe instances, publications in the mass-media, an address to the president where each of such actions in the clever structure of the society, should have served to the good. But in fact, on the other hand, such "silliest" orders in conditions of "the clever structure of the society” are impossible...
NatPress, Aslan Shazzo
http://www.natpress.net/stat_e.php?id=4845
