NOT ALL COURTS ARE “BASMANNY”

COURT YES CASE

Novaya Gazeta continues to publish “reviews of fair justice in Russia” based on materials from the Judicial Information Agency (ASI). The farther from Moscow, the less dominance of politics in the courts, as a rule, the less influence ...

Novaya Gazeta continues to publish "reviews of fair justice in Russia" based on materials from the Judicial Information Agency (ASI).

The farther from Moscow, the less the dominance of politics in the courts, as a rule, the less the influence of the “Basman element”. In the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, courts often make decisions in defense of the rights of citizens and against the authorities (administration, police, prosecutors, large commercial structures).

Our reviews (today is the fifth one published as part of a common project) receive quite a lot of responses. Alas, most of them come from those citizens who have lost their cases in the courts. Here it is necessary to clarify that the ASI is a journalistic agency, it does not provide legal assistance. In addition, our correspondents in the regions are specifically looking for precedents not for defeats, but for judicial victories of the “little man”.

At the same time, in our mail there was also a letter from Vera Timofeevna Shemyakina, a teacher who won her case in one of the courts of the Moscow Region, but is now not sure that she will be able to fulfill this decision in another. We advise Vera Timofeevna to go to the bailiffs with this newspaper in her hands and say that the letter is "under control" at the ASI. Then you will tell us about the results of this experiment, and we may publish your story.

The website of the Judicial Information Agency on the Internet is www.cia.ru.

Rostov-on-Don

The director was dismissed by the court

The head was disqualified by the court for three years for not paying wages on time

Last year, Energostroyservis broke all the "records" in terms of the number of court hearings in Volgodonsk, Rostov Region, where the claims of its employees against the administration of the enterprise were heard. All claims were of the same nature - salary delays (night, overtime, etc.), which in some cases reached up to a year.

The Volgodonsk city court satisfied the claims of all people whose rights were violated by employers, and the bailiffs clearly executed his decisions. 170 people who submitted writ of execution to the service received what they earned.

Moreover, the State Labor Inspectorate for the Rostov Region conducted a re-inspection at Energostroyservis and found new violations of labor laws. It turned out that the enterprise massively delays the final payment upon dismissal, does not pay vacation pay, does not keep records of hours worked, and night time, overtime hours are paid as work under normal conditions.

Meanwhile, the first inspection of Energostroyservis was carried out by the State Inspectorate three months earlier. As a result, General Director Valentin Sukhatsky was brought to administrative responsibility and fined an amount equal to 20 minimum wages (minimum wages). The general did not appeal the decision of the inspectorate, but paid the fine.

Due to the fact that during the re-inspection, previous violations were revealed, her materials were sent to the court. Having considered the submitted materials, Justice of the Peace Irina Bosenko issued a decision: “To recognize Sukhatsky Valentin Nikolayevich, the General Director of Energostroyservis, as guilty of an administrative offense ... and to be punished in the form of deprivation for three years of the right to hold leadership positions ... ". It should be noted that such a punishment of the head in the judicial practice of the city and the region is almost unique: for Volgodonsk - this is the first case, for the region - the third.

Katerina POGONTSEVA

Ekaterinburg

Blood in the police office

Despite all the efforts of the police authorities, four employees of the criminal investigation department were convicted of illegal search and torture of a suspect

On March 15, 2003, Alexander Yazovskikh (who was suspected of buying up stolen goods) turned to the head of the Central Internal Affairs Directorate of the Sverdlovsk Region, General V. Vorotnikov, with a statement in which he wrote that on the night of March 13-14, 2003, a horde of drunken policemen burst into his place. They carried out an illegal search and, although they did not find anything, they took Alexander and his fiancée (and now wife) Ramziya to the Verkh-Isetsky District Department of Internal Affairs in Yekaterinburg.

There they were beaten, Alexander's nose was broken, he was tortured with electricity, he repeatedly lost consciousness. The policemen demanded that Alexander take on other people's crimes, otherwise they would “let his bride go around in circles”.

The police, including the leadership of the regional police department, stood up like a wall to protect their colleagues. The Yazovskys' statement of March 15, 2003 was not followed up. When he turned to the prosecutor's office, the leadership of the Verkh-Isetsky District Department of Internal Affairs and the Main Department of Internal Affairs of the Sverdlovsk Region resorted to outright forgery in order to give the appearance of legality to the actions of their subordinates. The police set up ten perjurers who claimed that no one had laid a finger on Yazovsky and his fiancée at the police department.

However, drops of blood in the police office, Yazovsky's broken nose, as well as the testimony of his neighbors and relatives, did not fit into this version. As a result, four employees of the criminal investigation department of the Verkh-Isetsky District Department of Internal Affairs of Yekaterinburg were convicted under Art. 286 part 1 and part 3 p. "a" of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (the case was conducted by the Deputy Chairman of the Verkh-Isetsky Court

Ekaterinburg Nikolai Alekseevich Morozov).

The Criminal Collegium of the Sverdlovsk Regional Court upheld the verdict.

True, all the police officers who gave false testimony and falsified documents at the trial continue to work in their places. None of them received any punishment. Apparently, protecting the honor of the uniform, the prosecutor's office did not initiate a criminal case under the article on perjury.

PS The non-profit organization "Public Verdict" fund paid for the work of lawyer Vladimir Kapustin, who will provide further legal assistance to Alexander Yazovskikh.

Alexander LIVCHAK

Yaroslavl

The shadow of the Soviet house manager

The court considered that, having lived 26 years at school, the former cleaning lady has the right to remain there after retirement

Irina Vitushkina has been living with her family for 26 years at a regular school in the city of Danilov, Yaroslavl Region. In 1978, she got a job working here as a technician, and since she had no housing, the director provided her with a room directly at the school itself - an isolated room of 23 square meters with a fenced-off kitchen. It was convenient for everyone: on the one hand, the employee was at the workplace all the time, including as a free watchman, on the other hand, the housing problem was resolved.

However, not so long ago, with the onset of retirement age, the cleaning lady quit her job: for health reasons, it was contraindicated for her to engage in physical labor. This is confirmed by medical certificates. She remained in the school premises to live, since, in fact, she had nowhere to move. Officially, the room was not fixed, Irina Vitushkina moved in here with the verbal permission of the former director of the school, now also a pensioner. The new school administration demanded that Vitushkina vacate the premises, and when she refused to do so, the family was cut off from the toilet and running water: the doors were blocked, and that was it.

The former cleaning lady filed a lawsuit to recognize the right to use the disputed premises and to remove obstacles to using it. In addition, the plaintiff demanded that the right of passage through the office premises of the school be returned to her.

The school administration filed a counterclaim demanding to evict the family, referring to the fact that, according to the instructions of the sanitary and epidemiological station and the fire department, outsiders cannot live in the school, especially since the disputed area is not a residential area. The Vitushkins filed a new lawsuit against the administration of the municipal district and the school to provide them with other premises. The county authorities did not recognize these demands, stating that the Vitushkins had no grounds established by law for providing other housing.

However, the judge of the Danilovsky District Court Olga Borbat, having studied the circumstances of the case, decided to satisfy Vitushkina's claim. The court considered that the termination of the employment contract cannot affect the right to use the toilet, and since the family used this housing as their apartment for 26 years, this premises should be left to them in the future until another housing that meets the necessary sanitary and technical conditions is provided. requirements.

Tatiana KOLESOVA

Velikiy Novgorod

It was impossible to judge the killer

After five months, which the girl spent in an educational colony, it turned out that she was sent to places of deprivation of liberty ... by mistake

Last autumn, this criminal case was one of the loudest in the city of Borovichi, Novgorod Region. A very young girl, Alexandra K., was brought to justice for the murder of her own father. The murder had all the signs of a “domestic crime”. During the investigation, which was conducted by the investigator of the Borovichi inter-district prosecutor's office, Zhan Karchebny, it turned out that Alexandra stabbed her father with a knife when he was in a deep binge and, without any reason, began to "drive" the family.

On the basis of the collected evidence, the investigator concluded that K.'s actions should be qualified not as premeditated murder, but as infliction of grievous bodily harm resulting in death (Article 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). In court, the lawyer asked to reclassify the actions of the defendant to art. 113 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (the same, but in a state of passion). Taking into account the testimonies of witnesses, the court agreed with the position of the defense and issued a mild sentence: one year of real imprisonment in an educational colony.

The verdict of the court was not appealed on cassation, and soon Alexandra was transferred to the place of imprisonment. And that's where the thunder came from. Already after the convict spent several months in the colony, one of the employees of the educational institution drew attention to a small inconsistency in the case file. The girl committed her crime a week before her own 16th birthday, while criminal liability under Art. 113 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation occurs only from the age of 16. Consequently, according to the law, Alexander K. could not be prosecuted under this article at all.

The City Court's verdict has now been overturned. After an “erroneous” five months in an educational colony, the girl returned to her hometown. Neither she nor her mother filed civil suits in connection with unlawful prosecution.

Alexey KORYAKOV