Authors

Discussion

How can judicial and political systems that formally involve democratic institutions and processes nevertheless marginalise and discriminate against minority groups? Exploring how Russian political and legal systems treat some unpopular religious minorities gives us some useful hints. Manipulating popular perceptions, they make use of ‘wedge’ or ‘hot button’ issues, that is those issues, such as ‘gay rights’ or ‘extremist religions’, that are pointed to as controversial and potentially adversarial, dividing ‘the people’ and undermining its unity, security and wellbeing. Political authorities can push these issues like ‘hot buttons’ to test individual and group loyalty and trustworthiness. Drawing on a range of documents and the authors’ practical experience, this paper shows how the ‘wedge issues’ are used in Russian courts in relation to unpopular minority religions. In particular, it explores what has become a comprehensive system of ‘socio-linguistic expertise’ as a legal instrument allowing maintaining an aura of epistemological and legal validity while removing actual analysis from the social reality of targeted minority groups or individuals. The anti-extremist legislation has created a legal frame of reference for this system while its participant academic experts have developed their own vocabulary, performative acts and ‘epistemological alliances’ with the judiciary.