Ulyanovsk protesters: arrests

“They detain them in Moscow? Why shouldn’t we detain them?” — I heard such a strange argument from police officers when I approached the city police department of Ulyanovsk. The argument surprised me, because, to put it mildly, it is quite far from the Convention on Human Rights and Freedoms, and even more so from the Russian Constitution.

From the young people gathered at the police building, I learned that Konstantin Troshin, a children's teacher and lawyer, was taken by ambulance to the traumatology department of the BSPM (emergency hospital). Having arrived there, I learned from the words of the doctor who examined Konstantin Troshin that the matter was limited to a visual examination and the administration of painkillers. According to the surgeon Viktor Gus, who provided first aid to the detainee Konstantin Troshin, he suffered a painful shock after the use of the grip, and the shoulder tendon and elbow joint were possibly damaged. But the police officers were rushing the traumatology doctors, and therefore the X-ray was not taken.

At the request of Konstantin’s relatives, I went to the magistrate’s court of the Leninsky district of Ulyanovsk. On the way they told me about what had happened. Konstantin Troshin was the head of the organizing committee “For Fair Elections!”, and actively participated in the rallies “Ulyanovsk against NATO” and “Ulyanovsk against corruption.” On March 18, 2012, from 12.00 to 13.00, a picket was held, agreed with the mayor's office, with demands to hold a referendum on the legitimacy of power in Russia.

Police officers provoked a conflict situation; first, police officers detained two minors in masks who approached the picket participants. But, since it turned out that they were not direct participants in the picket, new charges were brought against the organizer of the picket, Konstantin Troshin, allegedly the picket participants interfered with the customers of the M-Video store located 30 meters from the picket, and the police officers have statement from the store management.

However, having examined the photographs and videos, I am inclined to think that the management of M-Video could have been much more disturbed by the police cars parked just opposite the entrance to the store, but not by the picket participants. The arguments of Vyacheslav Yemelyanov, the head of the youth branch of Yabloko, who participated in the rally, were also reasonable, who noted that as the organizer of the picket, Troshin cannot be responsible for everything that happens far outside the venue of the event, and the police claims against him were unfounded and far-fetched.

And the conflict associated with the detention of teenagers was due to the fact that police officers parked the minibus for “loading” right at the door of the M-Video store.

However, claims from the head of the Ulyanovsk MOB, Police Colonel Groshkov, were addressed directly to the organizer of the picket. Konstantin Troshin suggested that police officers draw up a protocol for violating the event at the picket site and then sort out the situation in court. But the police officers were not satisfied with this proposal, and they suggested that he “voluntarily go into the police car to draw up a report.” As the organizer of the picket, he objected that such actions are directly aimed at disrupting a public event, and the police are deliberately looking for a reason for a more or less “outwardly legal” reason to suppress it. In addition, I drew the attention of representatives of the city police department to the fact that some police officers, while in uniform and on duty, are clearly intoxicated. This was followed by the immediate harsh detention of Konstantin Troshin using painful holds and a number of other participants: Nail Imameev (Left Front), Denis Shtylev (Other Russia), Yuri Pankov (movement of Russian socialists "Volnitsa"), Ilya Sotnikov, Sergei Petrovichev , Vladimir Kuzin (representatives of the national union of the Ulyanovsk region). In total, seven people were detained, and summonses were issued to five more, including Vyacheslav Emelyanov (Yabloko).

In court, Konstantin Troshin asked me to defend him due to poor health. The ambulance that arrived again administered painkillers to him, but avoided the court’s question about the possibility of his participation in the process, citing that this was not their competence.

The case of administrative offenses under Article 20.2 Part 2 and 19.3 Part 1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation against Konstantin Troshin was conducted by Judge Elena Khaustova. I was forced to draw the court’s attention to Troshin’s condition, to the fact that in violation ofthe Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs No. 248 of April 1, 2009 “On approval of instructions on the procedure for performing duties and exercising the rights of the police in the duty station of the Department of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation,” police officers did not comply with paragraph 18.2 and the rights of the detained person in part 18.4 were violated, in addition, the administrative detention for the period from 12.45 to 21.00 was not at all motivated and not justified by the police officers. Since they refused to comment on what was happening, to give explanations, citing orders from management and the fact that they were “just following orders.”

When reviewing the protocols on administrative violations, I did not find among them the protocol on administrative detention provided for in Article 27.4. Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, but in other protocols drawn up I see a number of gross violations, which I consider to be premature and inappropriate to write about.

The court accepted for consideration my request to postpone the consideration of the case for 48 hours, due to the fact that Konstantin Troshin is either in a state of pharmacological intoxication from the received dose of painkillers, or he has a high sensitivity to these drugs, but in this state he cannot take part in the process and properly answer the court’s questions on the merits of the case.

The submitted petition was granted by the court, and the consideration of the case was postponed until 15.30 on March 20, 2012. I have no complaints against the judge, strict adherence to procedural norms.

The remaining detainees received from 6 to 7 days of arrest for obstructing the passage of police vehicles.

In general, regarding what is happening in the city and in this particular case, I am certainly surprised by the position of the authorities and the police. What else were you waiting for?

Young people have been raised in the spirit of patriotism for quite a long time, some of the teachers of life safety and other subjects, veterans themselves and combatants, both in schools and institutes, and of course they passed on their attitude towards NATO troops. Therefore, the reaction of young people is quite expected and negative. Moreover, in the heat of election rhetoric, it was the opposition that was accused of “complicity” with the US State Department and admiration of the West, and then, after the elections, Rogozin flew to Ulyanovsk and gave the go-ahead for the establishment of a transport and customs hub and a recreation area for military personnel and cargo in the city NATO countries withdrawing from Afghanistan.

Arguments that this is economically beneficial cause bewilderment not only among young people, but also among the older generation, and even more so among military veterans who served in various hot spots. And the population has questions for the authorities about the “monetization” of patriotism, and no less reasonable: “How much did they sell their Motherland?”

In general, the issue of the government’s honesty towards citizens is perhaps the most pressing at the moment. Such “stability”, based on repression and infringement of the rights of citizens, is hardly a worthy start to the third term of Vladimir Putin; who will believe him after this when he takes his oath on the Constitution of Russia, protects the rights of citizens and is the guarantor of the protection of these rights?

I am grateful to the federal and local media that paid attention to the situation.

Photos and videos courtesy of Ekaterina Isaeva.










Original