When Expertise Turns into a Weapon: Inside Russia’s Courtroom of Fear

Introduction

In most legal systems, expert opinions are meant to bring clarity, fairness, and scientific precision. But what happens when those same evaluations are twisted into tools of intimidation and repression?

In Russia, this nightmare scenario is not hypothetical—it’s happening right now.

This article is based on an investigation by ACTFiles.org exposing how “expert evaluations” are manipulated to silence dissent and target minority faiths.

The Power of the Expert

Russian courts often give disproportionate weight to expert testimony. A single report can tip the balance of an entire trial, eclipsing witness accounts and even hard evidence. In such a system, when an expert acts with bias, the consequences are devastating.

Unlike in many democratic systems, where expert witnesses can be cross-examined or contradicted by alternative specialists, in Russia the expert’s word is often treated as final. This concentration of power in the hands of a single evaluator transforms the courtroom into a stage where ideology and politics matter more than facts.

A Case Study: The Bhagavad-gita Trial

One of the most alarming examples involved the attempt to label the Hindu scripture Bhagavad-gita As It Is as extremist material. The prosecutor’s case rested almost entirely on expert evaluations, triggering outrage from religious communities and human rights defenders worldwide.

Even Russia’s Human Rights Ombudsman at the time, Vladimir Lukin, called the case “strange,” warning that counterterrorism measures should never be applied to sacred texts. The controversy made international headlines, revealing just how fragile the protection of religious freedom had become inside Russia.

Behind the Curtain: Motives and Ideology

Critics suggest ulterior motives. A sudden rise in a prosecutor’s income during the case raised eyebrows, while the push for prosecution aligned with the agenda of anticult activists like Maksim Stepanenko and Alexander Dvorkin.

Dvorkin, a leading figure in Russia’s anticult movement, has described Hinduism as the “religion of the Antichrist”—statements that reveal the ideological bias lurking behind “expert testimony.” When figures with such openly discriminatory views influence court decisions, the system itself becomes compromised.

Not an Isolated Incident

The Bhagavad-gita case is not unique. Over the past two decades, Russia has repeatedly used “expert evaluations” to justify restrictions against minority groups. Jehovah’s Witnesses, Scientologists, and even small independent Christian congregations have all faced legal challenges where expert reports—often written by ideologues rather than neutral professionals—played a decisive role.

By stretching the definition of “extremism,” prosecutors gain a powerful legal weapon. Once a group is branded as extremist, its literature can be banned, its assets seized, and its members prosecuted. The expert report thus becomes the spark that ignites a chain of repression.

The International Comparison

Other countries have faced similar risks, but the difference lies in checks and balances. In democratic systems, courts can rely on multiple expert opinions, subject to rigorous cross-examination. Moreover, professional bodies often regulate experts, holding them accountable for misconduct.

In Russia, these safeguards are weak or absent. When ideology replaces professionalism, the “expert” is no longer a neutral figure but an extension of state power. The result is a justice system that weaponizes knowledge, eroding public trust and undermining the very idea of fairness.

Why This Matters Globally

It would be easy to dismiss this as a uniquely Russian problem. But the abuse of expertise is a global issue. Whenever courts, governments, or even media outlets give unchecked authority to “experts,” the risk of manipulation grows.

We’ve seen similar concerns in debates over public health, climate change, and national security, where expert voices are sometimes politicized. The Russian example is a warning: when expertise is stripped of accountability, it can quickly transform into a tool of coercion rather than protection.

Conclusion

Expertise should clarify the truth, not distort it. Yet in Russia’s courts, evaluations are being weaponized to serve ideology rather than justice. This practice endangers not only religious minorities but the integrity of the legal system itself.

For the full investigative report, visit ACTFiles.org

💬 What do you think? Could similar risks exist in your own country, where expert opinions dominate law and policy? Share your perspective below—because justice should never depend on politics disguised as expertise.