Sharov-Velon was not allowed to visit his client Barabanov in the colony

On May 6, a member of the Committee on May 6, Sergei Sharov-Delon, was not allowed to visit in the Ryazan IK-6 of his client-swamp prisoner Andrei Barabanov. It is reported by the human rights activist himself.

Sharov-Velon has a document of the Zamoskvoretsky court, which confirms his powers as the defender of Barabanov and after the end of the process. According to the human rights activist, he had previously visited Barabanov in the colony and there were no problems.

However, this time he was demanded by the decision of the Ryazan court. Employees of the colony could not explain what they are not satisfied with the official explanation of the federal judge. Sharov-Delone demanded that he give him a written refusal.

“I will decide through the court,” the human rights activist wrote. He noted that Barabanov himself is fine. “These are games against defenders as a class,” says Sharov -Delone.

Barabanov was held in the "case of eight". On February 24, 2014, the judge of the Zamoskvoretsky court Natalia Nikishina sentenced him to 3 years 7 months in prison under Article 318 of the Criminal Code (the application of violence to a representative of the authorities) and part 1 of Article 212 (participation in the riots). The accused under the same articles Stepan Zimin, Denis Lutskievich and Alexei Polikhovich received 3.5 years, Artem Savelov - 2 years 7 months, Yaroslav Belousov - 2.5 years. Alexander Dukhanina was given a suspended sentence. The court had severe mass detentions (

In early March, it became known that Barabanov and Alexei Gaskarov, convicted of the second “swamp case”, demanded that they cancel the punishment under article 318 as excessive . Barabanov filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court, and Gaskarov - to the Moscow City Court.

As the lawyer of prisoners Ramil Akhmetgaliev explained, they are found guilty of participating in the riots. But according to the Criminal Code, mass riots are actions, "accompanied by violence, pogroms, as well as the use of violence to representatives of the authorities."

“The 212nd article already includes violence against representatives of the authorities, but they actually duplicated the accusation,” the lawyer noted. “The application of violence to the policemen of the first instance, according to sentences, was considered a form of participation in the riots. It turns out that people were punished twice for the same thing.”

At the same time, the complaint says that the defense considers the very fact of the mass riots in Bolotnaya Square unproven, therefore, in addition to lifting the charges under Article 318, it requires a revision of the criminal case of both activists and their complete excuse.