Authorities' reaction to appeal in Suleimanova’s support disappoints activists

The administration of the Russian Presidential has forwarded the appeal demanding an efficient inquiry into Seda Suleimanova’s disappearance to the General Prosecutor's Office (GPO) and the Investigating Committee of the Russian Federation (ICRF). Activists said they were disappointed with this answer, while Telegram users found it predictable.

Are we disappointed with the answer? Yes.

Activists have received an answer from the presidential administration, says a report posted today in the Telegram channel "Where is Seda?". "It is as laconic as possible: our appeal has been forwarded to the Russian GPO and ICRF. Are we disappointed with the content of the response? Yes, we are. Shall we continue struggling? Yes, we will," activists have promised.

The response from the presidential administration was drafted and sent on the day the appeal was submitted, on May 13, the report says. "The delay in receiving it was caused by postal delivery. We don’t know why there was such a rush," the report says.

The report is illustrated with two photocopies of the documents on letterheads of the presidential administration for handling requests from citizens and organizations. Both responses are dated May 13 and signed by V. Schukin, chief adviser of the department of software, hardware, and information and analytical support.

One document states that the appeal addressed to Russian President was sent to the GPO; the other document states that the appeal under the same number was "redirected for consideration" to the ICRF.

I suppose they just have a ready-made button that prints out such formal replies.

As of 1:40 p.m. Moscow time, six comments were posted under the report. Some of their authors treated the presidential administration’s response as predictable.

"Well, that's pretty much expected," the user sam Moro wrote, among others. "I think they just have a ready-made button that prints out such formal replies. They press it without even looking into the paper," Kirill Manzevityy has expressed his opinion.

"It's actually hard to say what else the presidential administration could have done. In general, yes, it's strange. You write in the letter that the ICRF is inactive or ignoring it, while the presidential administration is like that: we're forwarding your appeal there. It’s strange, of course. On the other hand, a different situation may develop here. Perhaps the presidential administration will oblige them to provide investigators’ response; they will monitor and ask questions," the user Kristina has written.

"What a post is it: chief adviser of the software and hardware department?! And who and how has authorized him to respond to such appeals? An adviser to the security service department could have also signed it. What nonsense is it?" the user Elena Tardasova Yun has written.

This was originally published on the Russian page of 24/7 Internet agency ‘Caucasian Knot’ on May 23, 2025 at 01:44 pm MSK. To access the full text of the article, click here.