The refusal to satisfy the claim against the construction of the temple on the embankment of Krasnodar outraged activists.

THIS MATERIAL (INFORMATION) WAS PRODUCED AND DISTRIBUTED BY THE FOREIGN AGENT LLC "MEMO", OR RELATES TO THE ACTIVITIES OF THE FOREIGN AGENT LLC "MEMO".

The court refused to satisfy the claim of residents of the Yubileyny microdistrict, who are trying to contest the transfer of land on the embankment for the construction of a temple. The court's decision outraged activists, who called it unfair and will contest it.

As reported by "Caucasian Knot", in January, deputies of the Krasnodar City Duma approved a decision to seize part of the park for the construction of a temple. On March 19, 99% of participants in the public discussion expressed opposition to conducting religious ceremonies on the Christmas embankment of Krasnodar, however, the commission deemed the opinion of the opponents of the temple construction insignificant and recommended that the mayor grant permission for religious needs on the embankment. In early October, activist Vitaly Cherkasov filed a lawsuit against the city duma demanding to recognize the decision regarding the section of the embankment allocated for the construction of the temple as illegal.

The Primorsky District Court of Krasnodar refused to recognize as illegal and annul the decree of the Krasnodar city administration approving the planning of the territory on the Christmas embankment, where the construction of the temple is planned. The plaintiff was local resident Anastasia Vasilova. She requested to recognize the decrees of the Krasnodar administration No. 62 and No. 73 from January 14 and 15 as illegal, which became the basis for initiating the procedure for seizing land plots on the embankment for the construction of the temple, writes "Morning South".

The plaintiff insisted that the decisions should be annulled as they were made in violation of the Urban Planning Code, that public discussions should be held again, and that the established legal deadlines should be observed. A representative of the administration stated that the necessary procedures were followed, and the results of public discussions were taken into account when making decisions. He also referred to the prosecutor's conclusion, which did not reveal any violations of the procedure.

Activists, commenting on this decision to a correspondent of "Caucasian Knot" on November 2, stated that they disagreed with it.

"I disagree with the court's decision, I consider it unfair. I believe we are right," noted one of the activists, emphasizing that supporters of preserving the recreation area on the embankment will definitely appeal the decision.

This is our embankment, and that is why the residents are fighting for it

Speaking about the activity of the residents of Yubileyny, the activist anonymously reported that 60-70 people packed the largest courtroom. "They have never had such a turnout. And if the authorities were not afraid and allowed a rally in defense of the embankment, we could easily gather several thousand people there. This is our embankment, and that is why the residents are fighting for it," he stated.

The second activist, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity, stated that the court's decision was unfair as the court did not allow the collection of evidence. "This evidence should have demonstrated that the actions of officials violated regional norms," he stated.

The largest courtroom was packed to capacity

Speaking about the number of supporters of preserving the embankment who came to the court, the activist noted that, in his estimation, "just over 50 people" attended. "The largest courtroom was packed to capacity," he emphasized.

"The problem here is that not everyone could arrive at 11:00 on Monday. If it had been in Yubileyny, there would have been a colossal turnout," he added.

Speaking about further actions, the activist stated that initially, the defenders of the embankment published appeals, but after exhausting this form, they are trying to achieve the holding of a rally. "We started in 2024 by recording appeals – first to the mayor, then to the governor, then to Putin. The last one was the most massive – with the participation of a thousand people. After that, we realized that this form had exhausted itself and we are trying to hold a rally to convey to the authorities what we demand. But the problem is that we have been denied permission to hold a rally for six months on various pretexts, although we submitted applications every day. At first, we were denied because the place was supposedly occupied. Moreover, when we suggested several locations – first two, then three, then four, and even five – the excuses remained the same. But if in some places the "Young Guard" of "United Russia" was indeed holding something, in other places it was empty, and we documented that. Now the refusal is for another reason - missile danger, the danger of drone attacks. Meanwhile, various events regularly take place in the city, and we are, of course, upset that we are being denied," he concluded.

The complaint must be submitted through the Primorsky District Court itself

A lawyer, who spoke with a correspondent of "Caucasian Knot" also on the condition of anonymity, emphasized that the decision of the Primorsky District Court can be appealed in the Krasnodar Regional Court. "At the same time, the complaint must be submitted through the Primorsky District Court itself. If the document is sent directly to the regional court, it will be returned," he noted, adding that the deadline for submitting a complaint is one month from the day the court issued the decision in its final (reasoned) form.

On January 16, the head of Krasnodar, despite residents' protests, approved the planning project for the Christmas embankment in the Yubileyny microdistrict, where the temple is planned to be built. On April 26, security forces were deployed to the Christmas embankment in the morning, where local residents protested against the construction of the temple. The visit of Patriarch Kirill, who was supposed to lay the first stone in the foundation of the cathedral, did not take place.