Anna Usacheva, a press secretary of the Moscow City Court of the Moscow City Court with a proposal to discuss the relationship of experts, journalists and judges, is responsible for the newspaper Olga Romanova.

Anna Usacheva, a press secretary of the Moscow City Court of the Moscow City Court with a proposal to discuss the relationship of experts, journalists and judges, is responsible for the newspaper Olga Romanova.

Anna Usacheva,

The head of the press service of the Moscow City Court:

The sentence is not on the case

How the "expert community" protects its interests in the courts

"All over there!" - the judge blurted out and ordered to close the door of the courtroom. " Rita saw how I have been sitting at the computer for a long time, looking at the monitor screen, clutching my head with my hands, trying to start a report on the next process. I just returned from the Moscow district court and was going with thoughts to write the first lines of the material. Nothing went to mind.

She came up to me and said these words. Then she smiled and added: “Then it will go, you will write quickly. The main thing is unexpectedly and interesting to start. ” She was not a judicial journalist, she was not often in court, but she wrote reports well. On the contrary, I spent it in the courts every day, but it was hard for me to be given reports. We worked with Rita in the same edition. It was seven years ago.

About "Basmann Justice"

Then I began my material in other words simply because the judge did not say: "All went over." But I still remember Rita’s offer to intrigue the reader in this way. Even as a joke, it is difficult to laugh. It is terrible to imagine which state we will live in if the judges will talk like this with citizens. But it was this phrase that occurred to her. This means that such a stereotype of the relationship of the court and society firmly settled in the minds of those on whom it is designed. This is the very society. It forms its "expert group" of legally illiterate and aggressive people. And in almost all cases, the indigenous critics of the judicial system are corny are a interested party in specific cases in the production of judges. They use the media more often “in the way”, excellently aware that behind a bright quote and two epithets, the young correspondent will not go into the analysis of the evidence collected in the case. And then, the same bright word for the sake of blogs will begin to appear terms like “Basmann justice”. Dissatisfied with one specific solution “experts” are ready to replicate the aphorisms of their own composition in society, easily trying on lawlessness and arbitrariness for the entire judicial corps. Hence such an expression in statements, hence all this pathetic, often bordering not only with rudeness, slander and rudeness. In their reasoning regarding the activities of the Russian Themis, our skeptics sometimes reach calls for murder or reprisal against judges.

And at the same time they require the justice of strict compliance with the letter of the law. Electoral justice. And also freedom of speech. In which state would everything get away with such "experts"? Here in Russia. And the judges endure. And they continue to consider cases. The guarantor of the Constitution endowed them with a high status - the status of judges. They make decisions in the name of the Russian Federation. And their field is legal. Not a single “expert” will play on this field, here the dialogue begins with legal terms, and not with populist slogans of the scale of a cheap PR campaign. For this money, it is easier to find a professional defender or representative in court and defend his legal position, as is customary in a civilized society. The judges, by the way, easily distinguish the material “stuffed” with the paid conclusions of interested “experts”, from a high -quality and independent journalistic investigation.

If you return seven years ago, then in fairness it should be noted that the judges had neither desire nor necessity to talk with journalists. For this, they were rightfully reproached. All the media wrote about this closure then. And the materials came out one more beautiful than the other.

"About the acquittals ... for the hundredth time"

I would like to express my gratitude to lawyers who, with the persistence of maniacs, still repeat the figure as a spell: less than one third of a percent is a share of acquittals in Moscow. I had imprudence to calculate this figure back in 2004, working as a judicial journalist. But I could not really analyze it properly. Just did not have enough legal knowledge. Now I know that judicial statistics are one of the most difficult disciplines and it is necessary to treat it very carefully. It is pleasant in Journalist: they still quote these unfortunate "less than one third of the percent." But this figure does not give a real picture on justifying sentences regarding the convictions, or even more so the conclusions regarding the quality of justice. And she herself is generally not quite complete. Parably pulled out of a large table of statistical reporting.

In 2011, capital judges (magistrate and district, whose share accounted for the overwhelming part of criminal cases) considered criminal cases against 35,626 persons, 239 people were justified, 28 963 convicted. We get approximately 0.7 percent of the acquittal. It seems so far everything is correct. We remove from the total amount of the case considered by the judges in a special manner. It is clear that in this case an acquittal is rather an exception. It turns out that only cases against 17,680 persons were considered in the usual proceedings. And now we calculate from this number the percentage of acquittals - 1.4%.

This is the same share that I tried to make in my journalistic material an illustration of negligible amounts of acquittals. Firstly, erroneous: at least one third of the percent, and 1.4% of the acquittal. The criterion of the court’s work is an acquittal, as well as the accusatory, cannot be. Only the quality of the decision and the term of consideration of the case. Secondly, the figure does not give anything at all. Perhaps, only besides the quality of the investigation. If, according to judicial statistics, we had as acquittal sentences as accusations, our investigative authorities had to be dispersed, and as quickly as possible.

And the suffering of those 28 963 people convicted by the courts of Moscow will more than pay off a sense of justice from court decisions from tens of thousands of victims, whose rights are defended by our judges. For some reason, "experts" are silent about this.

This year, Moscow judges justified almost 250 people. These are people whom the investigation accused under various articles of the Criminal Code of Russia. To be precise, I will give everything: 108, 111, 115, 116, 126, 129, 130, 159, 162, 163, 174.1, 188, 213, 222, 264, 285, 286, 290, 328, 174.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. To analyze the law enforcement of the last article - the legalization (laundering) of funds or other property acquired by a person as a result of the crime committed, almost bloggers are being taken. A confused in legal terms, Internet users leave such comments on copyright texts and news about the application of new norms of the Criminal Code, that if we imagine that it really works like that, it will become terribly.

It is enough to look at the picture with the arrests on the so -called "economic articles of the Criminal Code" ...

For example, 2010, when these amendments were only adopted, the courts arrested 47 accused under articles on crimes in the field of economic activity (Articles 169-199 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) (taking into account the provisions of Article 108 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation), and for the whole of 2011, only five. At the same time, the basis was that these people were hiding from the investigation or violated the previously chosen other preventive measure. In fairness, I will add that in Moscow only 10% of the arrest decisions will appeal. The rest agree. And of these 10% of the appealed Moscow City Court in 20% of cases, he himself cancel or changes the arrest for a softer preventive measure, not related to deprivation of liberty. Such is arithmetic.

By the way, none of the judges who have pronounced justification sentences, contrary to my conclusions in that old note, have been dismissed. By the way, these are more than 80 professional lawyers in Moscow. Judges of the Basmann, Golovinsky, Dorogomilovsky, Zelenogradsky, Zyuzinsky, Kuzminsky, Kuntsevsky, Lefortovo, Lublin, Meshchansky, Nikulinsky, Perovsky, Presnensky, Savelovsky, Soltsovsky, Simonovsky, Tagansky, Timiryazevsky, Khamovniki, Khoroshevsky, Chertanovsky district and Moscow city courts, as well as magistrate judges The capitals who examined these cases at first instance work in their places and are not expelled with shame from the judicial corps.

Over the past couple of months alone, the Meshchansky District Court justified the acting Rector of the POU Academy of European Languages, accused of committing illegal entrepreneurship. The charge was not submitted sufficient evidence. The Savelovsky District Court decided an acquittal against V.N. Goryunov, who was accused of attempted fraud committed by an organized group or on a particularly large scale. The judge of the Dorogomilovsky court of Moscow justified A.Yu. Mikhailov, who was accused of committing an attempt on fraud on an especially large scale, fraud on an especially large scale, as well as in the legalization of funds or other property acquired by a person as a result of the crime. It was justified due to the lack of corpus delicti. And, instead of real imprisonment, the courts began to appoint large cash fines as a punishment. Thus, the Basmanny court recently considered the case of the former senior investigator of the investigative department at the Moscow-Kursk LUVD Ilya Ryanov and the lawyer of the Interregional Bar Association “Law and Man” by Georgy Balayan. The investigator was found guilty of attempting to receive a bribe, sentenced to two years in prison and a fine of 3.9 million rubles. A lawyer, found guilty of attempted mediation in bribery, was punished on one year of imprisonment, proof of lawyer and a fine of 2.6 million rubles. Or another example: the Kuzminsky District Court found the lawyer Sergei Goltyaev to be guilty of a bribery or forced to testify, or evading testimony, or to incorrect translation and sentenced to a fine of 70 thousand rubles.

By the way, the sanction of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code provides for up to seven years in prison.

My first -headed material under the heading “Independent scandal. Moscow judges are dismissed for acquittals, ”and now I understand this, was very emotional. Objectivity was prevented by the lack of mutual interest in the topic by the court. Catastrophic consequences can cause his silence. So it happened. A pause will always fill in the dissatisfied with the court decision. And the modern femid understands this well. Therefore, today, without discussing specific cases, she will conduct a thorough and constructive dialogue with the interlocutor, explaining in detail the essence of her law enforcement, motivating her decisions, forming a society, giving him the right to access information about his activity.

I have always been interested in the viability and effectiveness of the judiciary. When I had a chance to see her from the inside, I agreed without hesitation. It is terrible for judges that the verdict will be acquittal or accusatory, but that it can be canceled. This is a certificate of gross error, the security, which was indicated by colleagues. This is much stronger than public rejection, it is personal and deeply professional conviction. And any judge will defend it with its decision. So they were taught.

About "Mosgorshtamp"

Creating the press service of the Moscow City Court, I sincerely tried to understand the judges: their internal beliefs, the way of thinking, the mechanism of work. I wanted to explain the comprehensive interest of the media in this branch of the authorities and to form the habit of satisfying this interest in the judges. I will return to the terms. The legality of the decision of the district judge, Mosgorshtamp, confirmed the cassation instance, - the experts dissatisfied with the decision shout.

Again the numbers. In this matter you must be meticulous. I will explain: traditionally, a larger number of cases considered by the judges of Moscow constitute precisely civil cases. In 2011, more than 40 thousand were completed by production. From this number of cases, the courts satisfied the requirements of citizens in more than 80% of cases. This is, by the way about legal literacy. And yet ... Today, the Moscow City Court cancels every fifth decision of the judge of the lower link. About 20% of the decisions do not pass the cassation instance. Recognized as illegal. Well, what is Mosgorshtamp? The next aphorisms born in the minds of "experts" with a weak legal position in the case. Designed for replication in the media. Meanwhile, the court makes more than 80% of the decisions in favor of the applicants, thereby satisfying the claims of citizens.

I do not regret that I left the media. To see all this ... it was worth going to court. I see how the judges “root” for each case, how they are preparing for processes, how they are interested in new legislation, how deeply worrying and unproven criticism and with what interest they read materials about themselves in the media. And most importantly - how ready every time you are to clarify the position and to rightly form our citizens. I think everyone understands that without the support of the chairman of the Moscow City Court, Olga Egorova, the metropolitan femid would never have reached the level of such openness.

But “experts” against this background still build their conclusions regarding the corruption and bias of the Russian Themis. And in one, two, three specific cases, worrying them as parties in the case, they are already ready to pronounce the verdict to all domestic justice. Here is such a wide smear. In the calculation for replication, they are already ready to pronounce the sentence to our justice. The verdict is not on the case.

It looks like a gang, not a court

Anna Usacheva, a press secretary of the Moscow City Court of the Moscow City Court with a proposal to discuss the relationship of experts, journalists and judges, is responsible for the newcomer Olga Romanov:

However, such an act as slander is now decriminalized. When the Duma of the previous convocation finally undertook to cancel precisely slander, many, including me, were surprised at such a strange concern of the people's chosen ones. Indeed, usually this article of the Criminal Code (now sent to the Administrative Code) scared just journalists, and this allowed us to be in good shape. Yes, there is a law on the media, there is the responsibility of the chief editor, there are codes of professional ethics, and, in the end, this is the main component of our craft - not to lie. Therefore, the article in the Criminal Code did not seem so egregiously superfluous. However, after the legislative seizure of slander from the category of criminally punished acts, it immediately became clear why this was done: so that officials and other people interested in impunity could calmly slander citizens, especially socially active citizens, including journalists. Or on lawyers. Or on uncomfortable politicians. What we are now observing in the upward trend - and either there will still be.

A wise honored lawyer and aksakal of judicial practice told me in response to these my reasoning: then let's then we will slander them? And we sat down with him to come up with slander-not on Usachev, of course, but on the main defendants in the current socio-political life from the current crooks and thieves. And they could not. Life is richer than fiction. Although write down your miserable fantasies on the recorder-a trial in London (Berezovsky Versus Abramovich) or a scandal in Germany with the participation of the closest associate of the Russian Prime Minister, former Minister of Communications Leonid Reiman, convincingly demonstrates to us that some Russian citizens were born to make the kafka a time.

By the way, it is precisely the “process” of Kafka who habitually remembers those who, will and captivity (often in the literal sense of the word “captivity”) are faced with our judicial practice. Of course, the Moscow City Court sets the tone in this area. In this connection, let me thank professional lawyers-practitioners and theoreticians-teachers of the legal faculty of Moscow State University, who, overcoming mental pain, helped me read the essay of the Rupe of the Moscow City Court. And special thanks to a long-standing graduate of the legal faculty of St. Petersburg University, diplomomian Medvedev D.A. Maria Klochkova, in fact, it was she who was asked in the Moscow court, where she writes her comments. And it was her perplexed answer about Facebook that unexpectedly gave Mark Zuckerberg a middle name and a strange position.

Waiting for a St. Petersburg fellow student

I will give one of the lawyers here.

Smell or unscrewed diplomatically - and none of the readers inexperienced in judgment, perhaps, would not understand what the Moscow judicial system is from the inside. However, having begun to expose the representatives of civil society, contemptuously called the official, hardly “expert community”, the girl spoke more about judges and their mores than the enemy hire could come up with.

Во-первых, очевидно, что мы — гражданское общество или, по Усачевой, так называемое «экспертное сообщество» (спасибо, что не организованное преступное) воспринимаемся судьями как враги: ибо «защищаем свои интересы». Не скрою — это так. Гражданское общество защищает именно свои интересы. Большое количество юристов, журналистов, правозащитников, занимавшихся, например, судьбой обвиненного в педофилии Владимира Макарова, примеряли это ужасно несправедливое дело на себя. Ведь на его месте может оказаться каждый, система сбоев не дает. Или вот, к примеру, уважаемому профессору Евгению Григорьевичу Ясину, уверяющему, что физик Данилов, осужденный за шпионаж, на самом деле приличный человек, совсем не все равно, в какой стране будут жить его внуки и правнуки. То есть это принципиальный вопрос — вопрос о будущем страны. Усачева не понимает, что таких экспертов («экспертов» — в ее определении) невозможно купить. Но именно поэтому они так резки в своих оценках. С ними нельзя договориться. Они скажут все так, как есть, — и без денег, которые Усачева предлагает на них «не тратить». Ведь идейные противники самые непримиримые. Их не перекупишь. И это не говоря о том, что обвинение «экспертов» в продажности и сутяжничестве необходимо подкрепить фактологически. Иначе это — прямое оскорбление.

Во-вторых, желание главного московского городского судебного секретаря привлечь «экспертов» к ответственности за свою активность (а как иначе воспринимать слова «В каком государстве все сошло бы с рук этим экспертам?») попахивает сталинской системой координат. Расстрелять за инакомыслие? Us? Или Вас? Пусть поставит галочку сама в нужном месте.

Third. Средний процент оправдательных приговоров, причем в самые лихие годы — с 1937-го по 1948-й — был выше 10 процентов, что существенно отличается не только от нынешних наших достижений (причем с поправкой на изменения системы правосудия), но и от современных западных аналогов. В Европе сейчас оправдательных приговоров в среднем 20%. Так что Мосгорсуду гордиться здесь нечем. Оправдательные приговоры успешно оспариваются ровно в тех же российских судах в 800 раз чаще, чем обвинительные.

В-четвертых, хороши примеры. Нам и без Усачевой известно, что ментов судят не так пристрастно, как обычных граждан, поэтому приведенный пример со штрафом для милиционера вместо срока не может быть репрезентативным. Свои своих не сдают, это Усачева правильно подметила. Это похоже на банду, а не на суд. Сходите в Арбитражный суд к Антону Иванову, поучитесь у него. Уж лучше пусть Мосгорсудом руководит какой-нибудь питерский сокурсник, чем вся эта некомпетентная и завистливая команда.

Merit to the Fatherland

Теперь позвольте пару слов без протокола, как пел тот, кто «спасибо, что живой». Обладая, простите за судебный канцеляризм, широкими связями в разных слоях общества, я долгие годы интересовалась: а в связи с чем эта «некомпетентная и завистливая команда» так долго рулит на правовом поприще, задавая тон и остальным судопроизводителям?

«ЮКОС», — отвечали мне узкие слои хорошо информированного населения.

И что — ЮКОС? — допытывалась наивная идиотка (это я про себя). Дело вообще никак не сшито, и первое, и второе, а суды, особенно данилкинский, — позорище. Все эти приговоры развалятся с первым дуновением здравого смысла.

«Да, ты идиотка», — со вздохом констатировали печальный факт представители узких слоев хорошо информированного населения. «Егорова (глава Мосгорсуда) оказала Путину услугу, посадив Ходорковского». — Да какая же это услуга? Это медвежья услуга! Хотя бы по первому обвинению — его можно было судить за то, что он совершал! Все так делали — но прикопаться можно было бы по закону конкретно к нему. А судить за то, чего не было, — непродуктивно. И подсудимый в итоге приобретает заслуженный терновый венец мученика. А уж второе дело — вообще вселенский позор.

А ведь верно. Нельзя не признать, что в своем деле глава Мосгорсуда Ольга Егорова — редкий специалист. Однако к праву это имеет самое отдаленное отношение.