PoraValit
Home/Society/Articles

Photographer Aleksandr Strukov gets an extra year and a half in prison over remarks about Putin and Ukraine

By boriskov · Published on March 7, 2026

Photographer Aleksandr Strukov gets an extra year and a half in prison over remarks about Putin and Ukraine

Aleksandr Strukov, a 32-year-old Moscow photographer and former volunteer for Alexei Navalny’s headquarters, has been given an additional 18 months in prison over remarks he made after his first sentence was announced. With the terms partially combined, he now faces more than nine years in custody.

On February 26, the court found Strukov guilty under the article on “justifying terrorism.” The case was based on statements he allegedly made on November 3, 2023, after the verdict in his earlier case: according to prosecutors, he said “Death to Putin,” as well as “Glory to Ukraine,” and wished success to Ukrainian soldiers. The prosecution had asked for eight years in prison, taking his unserved term into account.

Case materials say that on November 30, 2024, a forensic linguist working with the FSB concluded that the phrase amounted to a call to kill the president. A new criminal case was opened on April 28, 2025. Defense lawyer Leonid Solovyov argued that the words could have been an emotional expression and asked either for an acquittal or for the case to be sent back to prosecutors.

“I do not consider myself an extremist, a terrorist, or guilty of anything. I do not repent and I am not going to change my views; I do not intend to reform,” Strukov told the court.

Strukov had previously been convicted over comments posted in the Telegram channel of Znak. After an appeal on January 30, 2024, his sentence was set at 7 years and 10 months in a general-regime penal colony and a fine of 180,000 rubles. The support project for political prisoners, Memorial, has recognized him as a political prisoner.

A source close to the defense told Novaya Gazeta Europe that the proceedings moved quickly and were conducted politely, but the verdict will be appealed. The defense maintains that, linguistically, the statement was an emotional outburst rather than an incitement to specific violent action.

Share this article