A court in Russia on Monday convicted the spokesperson of U.S. technology company Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, of justifying terrorism and sentenced him to six years in prison in a swift trial in absentia, Russia's independent news site Mediazona reported.
According to the outlet, the charges against Meta communications director Andy Stone stem from his remarks in 2022 following Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24 that year. Stone, who is based in the United States, announced temporary changes to Meta’s hate speech policy to allow for “forms of political expression that would normally violate (its) rules, like violent speech such as ‘death to the Russian invaders.’”
In the same statement, Stone added that “credible calls for violence against Russian civilians” would remain banned. The Russian authorities opened a criminal case implicating Stone and other unidentified Meta employees nonetheless, describing the statement as “illegal calls to violence and killings of Russian citizens.”
The authorities also outlawed Meta as an extremist organization and blocked Facebook and Instagram in Russia. Both platforms — as well as X, formerly known as Twitter, which has also been blocked — were popular with Russians before the invasion and the subsequent crackdown on independent media and other forms of critical speech. However, they are now only accessible via VPN.
Mediazona reported that Stone was initially charged with calling for terrorist activity, public calls for extremist activity and publicly justifying terrorism, but the first two charges were dropped in the final version of the indictment. The trial, in which Stone was represented by a government-appointed lawyer, began on Friday and concluded on Monday after only two hearings. Stone was sentenced to six years in a penal colony and barred from administering websites for four more years.
Meta declined to comment on the verdict.
In April 2022, Russia also formally barred Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg from entering the country.
Russia convicts the spokesperson for Facebook owner Meta in a swift trial in absentia
Russia convicts the spokesperson for Facebook owner Meta in a swift trial in absentia
FILE - Social media applications are displayed on an iPhone, March 13, 2019, in New York. An independent Russian news site has reported that a court in Russia convicted the spokesman of U.S. technology company Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, of justifying terrorism and sentenced him to six years in prison in absentia. (AP Photo/Jenny Kane, File)
PHOENIX (AP) — A judge on Friday rejected an effort by GOP lawmakers to use the term “unborn human being” to refer to a fetus in the pamphlet that Arizona voters will use to weigh a ballot measure that would expand abortion access in the state.
Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Christopher Whitten said the wording the legislative council suggested is “packed with emotion and partisan meaning” and asked for what he called more “neutral” language. The measure aims to expand abortion access from 15 weeks to 24 weeks – the point at which a fetus can survive outside the womb.
It would allow exemptions to save the woman’s life or to protect her physical or mental health. It would also prevent the state from adopting or enforcing laws that would forbid access to the procedure.
Arizona House Speaker Ben Toma, who is a co-chair of the legislative council, said the group will appeal the court’s decision to the state Supreme Court.
“The ruling is just plain wrong and clearly partisan,” said Toma, a Republican.
Aaron Thacker, communications director for Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, noted that the final decision on the ballot itself remains in the air.
“There’s still a lot of scenarios at play," he said. "Even after the secretary certifies the signatures, the courts have to decide if counties can put it on the ballot or not."
Arizona for Abortion Access, the organization leading the ballot measure campaign, sued the council earlier this month over the suggested language and advocated for the term “fetus,” which the council rejected.
Attorney General Kris Mayes wrote in a motion to submit an amicus brief that “fetus" and “pregnancy” are both neutral terms that the council could adopt.
“It’s incredibly important to us that Arizona voters get to learn more about and weigh our measure in objective and accurate terminology,” said Dawn Penich, communications director for the abortion access group.
Democrats have centered abortion rights in their campaigns in this year’s elections. Organizers in five other states have also proposed similar measures that would codify abortion access in their state constitutions: Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Nevada and South Dakota.
Arizona organizers submitted more than double the amount of signatures needed for the measure to appear on the ballot.
FILE - Arizona abortion-rights supporters deliver over 800,000 petition signatures to the capitol to get abortion rights on the November general election ballot July 3, 2024, in Phoenix. A judge on Friday, July 26, rejected an effort by GOP lawmakers to use the term “unborn human being” to refer to a fetus in the pamphlet that Arizona voters will use to decide on a ballot measure that would expand abortion access in the state. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin, File)
