Bitcoin’s Battle Over The Pending Supreme Court Ruling

835

The Russian Supreme Court is set to Decide on the fate of Bitcoin Sites. The Supreme Court of Russia has taken upon itself the responsibility to decide a case that may become set a precedence for the crypto sector.

This comes as the first appeal that has been instituted against blocking of Bitcoins related sources which shall be reviewed by the highest court. The appeal was launched on the 16th of February.

The appeal came after the decision had been made to restrict the access to Bitcoininfo.ru by a district court in the Russia’s Northern City.

The attorneys from both the center for digital rights law and Lawyers from Roskomsvoboda project made an appeal blocking the site that was issued by a court back in 2016

The attorneys are also appealing against restrictions imposed on the access to Localbitcoins.com which is a peer to peer exchange platform based in Finland. The decision by the high court is speculated to set a precedence in the crypto sector in Russia.

In another case, a court issued an access denial to more than 40 websites that were offering information’s relating to exchange services and Cryptocurrencies in Russia. The decision was however this was struck out by a city court in Saint Petersburg.

In this case the judges had stated that in the event of spreading the information about bitcoins and cryptocurrencies was resulting into an illegal activity in the Russian state after the prosecution effectively requested for a restriction to the access of this platforms.

In this decision, the judges noted that the Russian ruble was the main and official currency accepted in the state hence issuing other currencies was illegal

According to Roskomsvoboda, there is an uncertainty over the number of Russian websites that have been blocked. This is attributed to the fact that access to several dozens of domains was restricted.

The case regarding Bitcoininfo.ru was initiated by the district prosecutor after the website was found out to be blocked by the administrator’s in which case their lawyers insisted that there was no genuine and legal reason for closure of the website.

The site was also said that it was not offering transactions services hence thereby had not gone against any legislation through provision of information to its subscribers.