In all severity illegal

The verdict in the Pussy Riot case does not prove the motive for hatred for the social group and mitigating circumstances are not taken into account, the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court says to initiate supervisory proceedings. The document is published on Wednesday on the Supreme Court. The decision was made at the request of the Ombudsman Vladimir Lukin and the supervisory complaints of lawyer Irina Khrunova. The Supreme Court considered their arguments convincing and sent the verdict in the case of Punk-Molebne to the Presidium of the Moscow City Court.

The descriptive-motivating part of the sentence is about a crime based on religious hatred and enmity, but the motive for hatred for a social group has not been proved, the decision of the Armed Forces notes. In addition, the Khamovnican court did not consider the delay in the punishment of Maria Alekhina and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova until the children reached the age of 14. The verdict does not take into account the non -violent nature of the actions in the temple, the wishes of the victims, who did not insist on strict punishment, the young age of the Pussy Riot participants, the presence of children and other significant circumstances, the document notes.

The Supreme Court indicated that according to the sentence, Tolokonnikova’s sentence is calculated from March 4, 2012, while the real date of her detention, indicated in police protocols, on March 3. All this gave the judicial board the grounds for initiating supervisory proceedings.

On October 14, the Supreme Court upheld the verdict of Ekaterina Samutsevich , convicted of two years conditionally. The supervisory complaint filed by the activist and her lawyer Nikolai Lyubchenko was rejected.

On August 17, 2012, the judge of the Khamovnichesky District Court of Moscow, Marina Syrova, sentenced the Punk-Molebna participants in the CSS to two years of the general regime under part 2 of Article 213 of the Criminal Code (hooliganism based on religious hostility and hatred). However, on October 10 of the same year, the Cassation Board of the Moscow City Court replaced the Samutsevich deadline conditional . At the same time, the sentences of Tolokonnikova and Alekhina were left unchanged.

Before considering a cassation appeal , Samutsevich refused to the services of her lawyers Mark Feigin, Nikolai Polozov and Violetta Volkova. Instead, the political prisoners began to be defended by the lawyers of the Agora, Irina Khrunova and Farit Murtazin. At the meeting, Khrunova drew the attention of the cassation board that Samutsevich did not manage to take part in Punk-Molebne, as she was withdrawn by security from the church before the start of the action.

In early March, Khrunova, who by that time represented the interests of all three convicted activists, filed a supervisory complaints about the decision of the cassation board to the Presidium of the Moscow City Court. Nevertheless, on March 20, these complaints were rejected .

On May 29, the chairman of the Moscow City Court Olga Egorova said that she would not revise the verdict to Pussy Riot to the Pussy Riot . In early April, Egorov on the air of NTV stated that in her power to mitigate the verdict. She also emphasized that she does not consider the Pussy Riot case political.

On June 26, the Moscow City Court refused to terminate the criminal case against Samutsevich in supervision . According to the resolution, there are no grounds for canceling or mitigating the sentence to the activist.