Translated material
Paper pigeons in court
Lawyer of the organization “Lawyers for Constitutional Rights and Freedom” (Yuriks) Maxim Krupsky talks about a long consideration in Moscow courts of administrative case in the footsteps of the anti -war gathering on March 2 in Moscow - cases against a woman who stood on Manezhnaya Square with paper pigeons. First, the Tver District Court in the absence of the “violator” sentenced her to a fine of 10 thousand rubles, then the Moscow City Court sent the case for a new consideration, and now the Tver court again issued the same decision as for the first time. Maxim Krupsky describes the second and third stages of passing the “Affairs of Pigeons”.
July 18 . Today the next court hearing was held to appeal the decisions on cases of spring detentions in Moscow. This time, the case on the anti -war action was listed on March 2 on the arena - the composition of 20.2 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.
My client was traditionally accused of what she had not committed, the policemen were traditionally not warned of liability for giving obviously false testimonies, but one of the judges of Moskalenko, this time the one from the Tver District Court, traditionally scored and imposed an administrative punishment in the form of a fine of 10 tons. Tverskaya Moskalenko, I must admit, went further than her colleagues and generally deprived my client’s right to defense, not letting her into the process on the grounds that she allegedly did not appear in court. Naturally, in court there was and even sat under the door of the courtroom all the few hours that the consideration of the case was delayed, but they called it just at the moment when she went to a smoke break for a couple of minutes, and said that the case was already examined without her when she returned.
In Mosgore, we were waiting for a judge Skanhenko, who reluctantly listened to the peaceful nature of the action, the instrument of the offense - paper pigeons, with whom my client was detained, but about which there is not a word in the case file, about the fictitious accusation and the inadmissibility of evidence, as well as a violation of the right to defense.
As a result, the formal grounds for canceling the decision of the Tver District Court were still found-the lack of my client at the hearing-and the case was sent for a new trial to the court of first instance.
Naturally, there is no need to talk about a crushing victory - the proceedings were clearly terminated, which was not done. But taking into account existing judicial traditions, even such a result is still a result.
November 4 . Today the next court hearing was held in the case of my client, which went on March 2 to Manezhnaya Square in order to express a silent protest against the approval by the Federation Council of the Federation of Decision of March 1, 2014 on the commissioning of troops into Ukraine. The means of visual agitation were two white paper pigeons, independently made by the client. The form of a public event is a single picket.
Despite this, the policemen were charged with the client "participation in an unauthorized rally and shouting slogans."
The previous decision in this case, issued by the federal judge of the Tver district court of Moscow Moskalenko, was canceled by the Moscow City Court in July, the case was returned to the court of first instance.
Today the case was listened to by the federal judge Orekhova, having carried out the whole process behind Karjabania with a handle of paper sheet for records with the face of a person who does not experience warm feelings in relation to those present.
In addition to traditional references to the norms of Russian and international law, our arsenal was replenished with a demonstration of the offense of the offense - a paper pigeon, which, despite its exceptional charm, expectedly did not make any impression on the chairperson.
As a result, a single picket is recognized as a rally, pigeons - slogans, client - guilty, fine - 10 tons.
The pigeon is destined soon to appear before the higher authority.