At the cellular level

Justice triumphed at the cellular level. On July 17, the European Court of Human Rights recognized humiliating human dignity and unacceptable content of the defendants in cells during the trial. Alexander Svinarenko and Valentin Slyadnev, who were sitting during the trial in cells and then complained to Strasbourg, will receive 10 thousand euros as compensation for non -pecuniary damage plus compensation for legal costs. Russian justice will have to cancel the cells for the defendants.

No one could never intelligently explain why these cells were needed. They were justified by security considerations. However, there were never cases of attacks by the defendants on the convicts or judges during the process. In any case, this was not publicly reported. Perhaps the domestic justice, obsessed with the mania of the prison, believes that Russian criminals are the most criminal criminals in the world. Because in normal countries there are no such cells. Nazi criminals, confused in the murders of millions of people, were sitting on the Nuremberg trials along with their lawyers in the courtroom, and no one guessed to shove them through the cells. The most notorious killers and maniacs also always sat on the usual bench of the defendants.

However, something similar once took place in history. In 1961, the former Obersturmbannführer of the SS Adolf Eichmann was judged in Israel for crimes against humanity. In the courtroom, he sat with two guards in a booth from bulletproof glass. Israeli justice feared that the Nazi, responsible for the death of millions of Jews, gypsies and Poles, could shoot someone out of a sense of revenge. The glass cage protected it from a possible attempt. However, the defense was short -lived - Eichmann was sentenced to death and hung in the summer of next year.

In Russia, the history of cells began in 1994. To whom this thought came to mind and what laws this practice is regulated is unknown. Rather, it is known that there are no such laws. The cells were posed in pursuance of the intra -disability of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. This order is not available to the general public.

Cells from welded reinforcing rods from the point of view of a free civilized person looked humiliating. Although in the opinion of Zek, of course, there are trifles. In investigative prisons, such wild arbitrariness is happening that it could not pay attention to the cells in the courtrooms.

In 2004, a know-how appeared on the process of Khodorkovsky and Lebedev: the cells glazed. They became similar to either a huge glass cabinet, or to the aquarium with the defendants floating in them. In the closet at the belt, there were small windows. Through them, bent in half, and the defendants and lawyers were forced to communicate among themselves. There were no ventilations in these aquariums, and in the summer it became unbearably stuffy. What the defendants say, it was difficult to hear through the glass, but the judges suited such a state of affairs. Why talk to the defendant? The defendant’s business is to listen to the verdict!

After some time, microphones began to be placed in aquariums. Now the defendants could speak without bending into the letter "G". However, their confidential conversations with a lawyer became heard by trial, accusation and public.

All talk about security in court is absolute nonsense, which is recorded by the decision of the European Court in the case of Pvinarenko and Slyadnev against Russia. The appointment of these cells is obvious: put the defense in an unequal position with the accusation, make it difficult to negotiate the defendants with lawyers and humiliate, as far as possible, the defendants and sympathizers of the people in the courtroom.

In 2012, another innovation appeared in the Pussy Riot case in the Pussy Riot case - dogs in the courtroom. No, not prosecutors and judges, but in the very literal sense of the word of the dog - an official Rottweiler or a German shepherd sat at the feet of a escort next to a cage for the defendants. Who and why did you need dogs in the trial? Russian justice to this question does not give an answer. Maybe the European court in Strasbourg will give.