Resolution in the case of an administrative offense by Alexey Makarov: terminate due to the absence of an event

RESOLUTION
in a case of administrative offense
Moscow
March 07, 2014

The operative part of the resolution was announced on March 5, 2014.

The reasoned resolution was made on March 7, 2014.

Federal judge of the Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow Korobchenko E.S., with the participation of Makarov A.A., defense attorney Pershakova E.Yu., having considered the case of an administrative offense under Art. 20.2 h. 5
Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses in relation to Makarov Alexey Alekseevich, born on 16
January 1985 in Moscow, citizen of the Russian Federation, married, working in the Memorial society as a historian, living in Moscow,
<…>

INSTALLED:

Makarov A.A. accused of committing an offense, liability for which is provided for in Part 5 of Article 20.2 of the Code of the Russian Federation on
administrative offenses, namely that he (Makarov A.A.) on February 21, 2014 at approximately 13:10 at the address: Moscow, st. Tatarskaya, 1, took part in holding a public event (picket) without submitting a notice of a public event in the prescribed manner, thereby violating paragraphs. 2 clause 4 art. 5 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation of June 19, 2004 “On meetings, rallies, demonstrations, processions and picketing”, namely, appeared in groups at the Zamoskvoretsky court
Moscow with other participants shouted the slogan “Freedom for political prisoners”, after which he was detained along with other participants.

During the consideration of the administrative case, Makarov A.A. did not plead guilty to the offense charged to him, explaining to the court that on February 21, 2014, he came to the building of the Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow, wanting to exercise his right to be present in the courtroom when the verdict was announced in the case of “riots” on May 6, 2012 g., did not commit any illegal actions, did not shout slogans, did not hold placards.

Defender of Pershakov E.Yu. requested that the proceedings in the case of an administrative offense be terminated for lack of
corpus delicti, since Makarov A.A. did not commit illegal actions, drew the court’s attention to the fact that the protocol on the case of an administrative offense does not contain the signature of the official who compiled it.

During the consideration of the present at the court hearing at the request of Makarov A.A. Chetvergov I.A. were questioned as witnesses. and Zakharkin M.S.

So witness Chetvergov I.A. testified that he was on February 21, 2014 near the building of the Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow, an eyewitness to the arrest of A.A. Makarov. was not, but was with him (A.A. Makarov) in the same car after his arrest near the courthouse.

Witness Zakharkin M.S. showed the court that on February 21, 2014, he saw the moment of the arrest of A.A. Makarov, who did not shout anything and did not hold placards in his hands.

Having listened to A.A. Makarov, his defense attorney, questioned witnesses, and examined the materials of the administrative case, the court comes to the following conclusions.

In accordance with Part 3 of Article 26.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the use of evidence obtained in violation of the law is not allowed.

According to Part 2 of Article 28.2 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses in the protocol on an administrative offense
the date and place of its compilation, position, surname and initials of the person who compiled the protocol, information about the person against whom a case of an administrative offense has been initiated, surnames, first names, patronymics, addresses of the place of residence of witnesses and victims, if there are witnesses and victims, place , time of commission and event of an administrative offense, article of this Code or the law of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, providing for administrative
responsibility for this administrative offense, explanation of the individual or legal representative of the legal entity against whom the case was initiated, other information necessary to resolve the case.

According to Part 5 of Article 28.2 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, a protocol on an administrative offense
signed by the official who compiled it, an individual or a legal representative of a legal entity against whom a case of an administrative offense has been initiated. If these persons refuse to sign the protocol, as well as in the case provided for in Part 4.1 of this article, a corresponding entry is made in it.

In the protocol on administrative offense No. 679972 dated February 21, 2014 presented to the court , there is no signature of the person, his
compiled, namely the duty officer for the emergency protection zone of the Department of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Presnensky district of Moscow, Lisovsky D.V.

These circumstances indicate that the administrative offense protocol was drawn up in violation of the requirements of the Code of Administrative Offenses.

The above circumstances are confirmed by the case materials examined at the court hearing, and no evidence to the contrary was presented to the court.

Thus, based on the requirements of Articles 28.2, 26.2, 26.11 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, having assessed the evidence collected in the case as a whole, the court comes to the conclusion that the document drawn up against Makarov A.A. Protocol on administrative offense TsAO 679972 dated February 21, 2014, was drawn up in violation of the requirements of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, and therefore, it cannot be recognized as admissible evidence and cannot be used as the basis for proving the guilt of A.A. Makarov in committing an administrative offense.

Under such circumstances, the court comes to the conclusion that, in this case, the event of an administrative offense provided for in Article 20.2 Part 5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation has not been proven.

According to clause 1, part 1, article 24.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, proceedings in a case of an administrative offense cannot be started, but the started
production is subject to termination if at least one of the following circumstances exists:

1) absence of an administrative offense event.

Under such circumstances, the proceedings against A.A. Makarov are subject to termination.

Based on the above, guided by Art. 24.5, 29.9–29.11 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, court

DECIDED:

The proceedings in the case of an administrative offense against Aleksey Alekseevich Makarov under Part 5 of Article 20.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation are terminated on the basis of Article 24.5, Part 1, Clause 1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation due to the absence
events of an administrative offense.

The decision can be appealed to the Moscow City Court through the Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow within 10 days from the date of delivery or receipt of a copy of the decision.

Federal judge Korobchenko E.S.