Navalny's precedent

“In Russia, you need to live a long time - interesting!” So in 1965 the poet Korney Chukovsky said. And so, damn it! Just yesterday, all of us who stood in the Leninsky District Court of Kirov and listened to the verdict on Navalny and Ofitserov literally felt with our skin how blackness and darkness were approaching us. But today, a ray of hope has appeared: perhaps we will be able to change something in this country, and what we have been talking about for the past few years - the release of political prisoners, fair elections, the emergence of an independent court - in the short term, even during our lifetime, will become reality. Real events always happen quickly. A call from the court When last night we had dinner with the lawyers of Navalny and Ofitserov, discussing possible prospects for reducing the sentence for the convicts in a month and a half on appeal in the Kirov Regional Court, and the secretary of the court called one of the lawyers on his mobile and invited him to the appeal hearing prosecutor's office, it clicked in my head: "They will be released!" It turned out that the prosecutor's office did not agree that judge Blinov arrested Navalny and Ofitserov in the courtroom without any explanation. There is no question that this position of Blinov had previously been agreed with the Kirov prosecutor's office, just as the verdict read out in court was also agreed. But a few hours after the verdict was announced, the secretary of the court called the lawyers and invited them to consider the complaint of the same prosecutor's office regarding the change in the measure of restraint for Navalny and Ofitserov! their detention demanded their release. Spirit and letter Lawyers and experts shrug their shoulders: it is just right to call the decision of the Kirov Regional Court "Navalny's precedent." In the jurisprudence of the Russian court, it has always been accepted that if a decision is made on a real term, then the convicted person, who was previously under house arrest or under house arrest, is taken into custody. Judges are so accustomed to the fact that higher authorities leave convictions unchanged that, without hesitation, they issue warrants for arrest. The Code of Criminal Procedure does not say anything about the fact that before the sentence enters into legal force, the measure of restraint should not be changed for the convicts if they are not in custody. But according to the letter of the law, since the sentence is not yet final, the higher instance can correct the first instance - assign a suspended sentence or send the case back for retrial. And then the arrest of the convict will be illegal, and he will be able to demand compensation for the days spent illegally behind bars. However, cases of annulment of decisions of the first instance at the cassation are so rare that judges play it safe: it is easier to take into custody and not worry that the convict will run away, will not appear at the cassation, and the judge will be accused of corruption and look like he will be fired for “excessive lenientness of the sentence.” Here and it turns out that until July 19, 2013, Russian judges acted, as they say, according to the "spirit of the law", using an accusatory bias in all its glory, and on July 19, 2013, the judge of the Kirov Regional Court Ignatiy Ambasinov acted according to the "letter of the law", changing the decision of the judge Blinova. What happened? Demand the impossible “Something went wrong,” apparently, they decided in the highest celestial and near-celestial spheres and inspired the prosecutor Bogdanov with the idea that Judge Blinov made a mistake and violated the rights of the convicts. And the same prosecutor Bogdanov, who once, when Navalny did not come to Kirov for trial, demanded that the accused be taken into custody immediately, quickly filed a complaint with the court, and the court promptly scheduled a meeting. And today, when the Kirov Regional Court explained why it supported the complaint of the prosecutor's office, recalling the European Convention on Human Rights, the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the election of the mayor of Moscow and the rights of a candidate for mayor, it became clear that the signal to the Kirov prosecutor Bogdanov was sent from the capital. And one more thing: it became clear how right Navalny was when he decided to run for mayor of Moscow. The prosecutor accepted the signal - and now Navalny and Officers are free, and this is the most important thing. And the second and also most important thing is that we all need to elect Navalny as mayor. “Impossible! » - skeptics will say. We must try. We must demand the impossible. What seemed impossible yesterday is possible today! Who knows, what if the lawyers at the “Bolotnaya case” trial continue to demand that the defendants be released from the cramped “aquarium” and put behind a barrier or transferred to another room, where there are two “aquarium” cages instead of one, Judge Nikishina their demands will it satisfy and being in court will cease to be a daily torture for the “prisoners of Bolotnaya”? Let's make the impossible possible. In any case, it won't be boring. And one more thing: Korney Chukovsky was damn right: “One has to live long in Russia - it’s interesting!”

“In Russia, you need to live a long time - interesting!” So in 1965 the poet Korney Chukovsky said. And so, damn it!

Just yesterday, all of us who stood in the Leninsky District Court of Kirov and listened to the verdict on Navalny and Ofitserov literally felt with our skin how blackness and darkness were approaching us. But today, a ray of hope has appeared: perhaps we will be able to change something in this country, and what we have been talking about for the past few years - the release of political prisoners, fair elections, the emergence of an independent court - in the near future, even during our lifetime, will become reality. Real events always happen quickly.

Call from court

When we had dinner last night with Navalny and Ofitserov’s lawyers, discussing possible prospects for reducing the sentence for the convicts in a month and a half on appeal in the Kirov Regional Court, and the court secretary called one of the lawyers on his mobile and invited him to a meeting on the appeal of the prosecutor’s office, it clicked in my head: “They let go!" It turned out that the prosecutor's office did not agree that Judge Blinov arrested Navalny and Ofitserov in the courtroom without any explanation.

There is no question that this position of Blinov was previously agreed with the Kirov prosecutor's office, just as the verdict read out in court was also agreed. But a few hours after the verdict was announced, the secretary of the court called the lawyers and invited them to consider the complaint of the same prosecutor's office regarding the change in the measure of restraint for Navalny and Ofitserov!

This has never happened in the practice of Russian legal proceedings in recent years - so that the prosecutor's office, after announcing a real term for the defendants and taking them into custody, demanded their release.

spirit and letter

Lawyers and experts shrug their shoulders: it's time to call the decision of the Kirov Regional Court "Navalny's precedent." In the jurisprudence of the Russian court, it has always been accepted that if a decision is made on a real term, then the convicted person, who was previously under house arrest or under house arrest, is taken into custody. Judges are so accustomed to the fact that higher authorities leave convictions unchanged that, without hesitation, they issue warrants for arrest. The Code of Criminal Procedure does not say anything about the fact that before the sentence enters into force, the measure of restraint should not be changed for the convicts if they are not in custody.

But according to the letter of the law, since the verdict is not yet final, the higher instance can correct the first instance - assign a suspended sentence or send the case for a new trial. And then the arrest of the convict will be illegal, and he will be able to demand compensation for the days spent illegally behind bars. However, cases of annulment of decisions of the first instance at the cassation are so rare that judges play it safe: it is easier to take into custody and not worry that the convict will run away, will not appear at the cassation, and the judge will be accused of corruption and look like he will be fired for "excessive lenientness of the sentence."

So it turns out that until July 19, 2013, Russian judges acted, as they say, according to the "spirit of the law", using an accusatory bias in all its glory, and on July 19, 2013, the judge of the Kirov Regional Court Ignatiy Ambasinov acted according to the "letter of the law", changing the decision judge Blinov. What happened?

Demand the impossible

“Something went wrong,” apparently, they decided in the highest celestial and near-celestial spheres and inspired the prosecutor Bogdanov with the idea that Judge Blinov made a mistake and violated the rights of the convicts. And the same prosecutor Bogdanov, who once, when Navalny did not come to Kirov for trial, demanded that the accused be taken into custody immediately, quickly filed a complaint with the court, and the court promptly scheduled a meeting.

And today, when the Kirov Regional Court explained why it supported the complaint of the prosecutor's office, recalling the European Convention on Human Rights, the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the election of the mayor of Moscow and the rights of a candidate for mayor, it became clear that the signal to the Kirov prosecutor Bogdanov was sent from the capital.

And one more thing: it became clear how right Navalny was when he decided to run for mayor of Moscow.

The prosecutor accepted the signal - and now Navalny and Officers are free, and this is the most important thing.

And the second and also important thing is that we all need to elect Navalny as mayor.

"Impossible!" skeptics will say.

Need to try. We must demand the impossible.

What seemed impossible yesterday is possible today!

Who knows, what if the lawyers at the “Bolotnaya case” trial continue to demand that the defendants be released from the cramped “aquarium” and put behind a barrier or transferred to another room, where there are two “aquarium” cages instead of one, Judge Nikishina their demands will it satisfy and being in court will cease to be a daily torture for the “prisoners of Bolotnaya”?

Let's make the impossible possible.

Either way, it won't be boring.

And one more thing: Korney Chukovsky was damn right: “One has to live long in Russia - it’s interesting!”