They painted the eighth

On November 10, in the Izmailovsky District Court of Moscow, the administrative cases of five people detained on August 18 in the town of Bauman, near Izmailovsky Park, were considered for a whole day. The defender of two of them, Oleg Tznisco, told the OVD-Info that the consideration of the cases was supposed to begin at ten o’clock in the morning (although in fact only about noon began). He left the court building in a deep evening, at half past nine.

The detention of the Center for Combating Extremism, Alexei Okopniy, and an FSB officer, known under the name “Lesha Smile”, who were well -known to activists. Six people were detained, but Nikolai Glukhin was later released, since he had a journalist’s certificate.

For two of the Izmailovo ATS, protocols on violation of the rules of the event (5th part of Article 20.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses) were drawn up, and on three-on a repeated violation of the same rules (8th part). This part of Art. 20.2 was submitted to the Code of Administrative Offenses in July 2014 in the framework of tightening legislation on public events. The reason for the establishment of administrative cases of repeated violation was the detention of Roman Roslovtsev, Kirill Filonenko and Alexander Shcherbakov at the “Vatnikov march” on July 19, 2015 near Moscow State University. Then OMON, also with the help of trenches and a “smile”, detained six activists who wanted to hold a joke action, depicting ardent supporters of the current government. In the Department of Internal Affairs of the Moscow State University, at all, they made protocols on the 5th part of Art. 20.2. Later, the Nikulinsky District Court decided to fine them all.

Oleg Tznisco emphasizes that the detainees in the town of Bauman did not take any event at all: “They did absolutely nothing. Even if they wanted to do something, they did nothing. ” However, as he claims, the CPE warned OMON in a few hours for the alleged action. One of the police officers confirmed this in court: according to Tznisco, he stated that the activists were detained "on the command of the" E "." The defender told the OVD-Info that the movements of the activists were watched for five to ten minutes before detaining.

One of the detainees, Alexander Shcherbakov, is sure that the participants of the “Vatniks march” were followed: “We are following us, or for some of us, a systematic surveillance is being conducted, including, including listening and tracking mobile phones, it is likely to read correspondence on the Internet.” He believes that this may be connected with their activities in the framework of the “free school of resistance” .

Tznisco emphasizes that the judge of the Nikulinsky court, Elena Kuznetsova, did not introduce the alleged offenders or their defenders, thereby violating the Code of Administrative Offenses, according to which the court ruling enters into force not only ten days after the execution, but ten days after it will be awarded to the “offender” or its defender. Tznisco and lawyer of the Public Verdict Foundation Nikolai Zboroshenko, also representing the interests of the detainees, later wrote appeals about the decisions of the Nikulinsky court. Judge Kuznetsova in response said that the defenders missed the deadline for filing a complaint. Nevertheless, the defense managed to achieve a appeal of decisions in the Moscow City Court, which recognized the legality of only part of the fines. The decision in the case of Roman Roslovtsev was canceled, since it was considered without the participation of protection, and returned to the district court. But the Nikulinsky court repeatedly issued the same decision, ignoring Zboroshenko’s request to postpone the meeting due to the fact that he did not have time to get from another court, and again examined the case without the participation of protection.

Tznisco assumes that the operatives began to track activists after the judge Kuznetsova “misled the center“ E ”, saying that the decision entered into legal force. “And in the Izmailovo Internal Affairs Directorate, not even having copies of the decision of the Nikulinsky court, not having information from the prefecture about whether this passage, a rally was allowed or what they could draw them, several people painted the 8th part,” the defender says. “Because the center“ E ”stood behind them.”

In the protocols, according to Tznisco, “Absolute Lies, everything is painted from the episode in the Moscow Park” was written. As Alexander Shcherbakov said, “they wrote that we scattered and trampled the St. George ribbons, sweeping them with a broom, one person was dressed in a quilted jacket, and Putin was on it, and everyone“ shouted mockingly “Putin - God!” And “Crimea - ours!” “The only thing that corresponds to reality is that these people in this place at that time really were, we do not argue with this. But nothing more, ”says Tznisco.

The Tznisco eloquently describes the current situation: “Unprofessionalism of the police of Moscow State University, which wrote completely stupid protocols, because there is a bunch of violations, unprofessionalism of the Nikulinsky court and specifically judge Kuznetsova multiplied by the Center“ E ”, the stupidity and non -professionalism of the police officer“ Izmailovo ”, and this is trying Izmailovsky court. "

As a result, Nikolai Zboroshenko was able to ensure that Roman Rosloslovtsev in the Izmailovsky court re-qualified the case from the 8th part of the article providing for a fine of up to 300 thousand rubles or arrest up to 30 days, for the 5th part, since the first decision of the Nikulinsky court was canceled. Raslovtsev was fined ten thousand rubles.

Kirill Filonenko, who did not appeal the decision of the Nikulinsky court and managed to pay the fine, the Izmailovsky court left the 8th part, having written out a fine of 150 thousand rubles. At the same time, the court ignored the amazing fact: during the meeting, the questioned police officers said that they would recognize Filonenko, but they pointed to Nikolai Zboroshenko who defended him. This was not even reflected in the court decision.

The consideration of the case of the third “repeated violator”, Alexander Shcherbakov, was postponed to November 27. According to Tznisco, it is unlikely to be able to apply the 8th part, since the decision of the Nikulinsky court has also been canceled with respect to him and the corresponding document is in the case file.

Another detained in the town of Bauman, Mikhail Chistov, was fined ten thousand according to the 5th part of Art. 20.2, and the case of Andrei Korolevsky should also be considered on November 27.

Defenders intend to move on and dispute the decisions in the Moscow City Court, and those that the Moscow City Court has already recognized as legal are in the ECHR. “The case is carried out with the sight to Strasbourg, without any options,” says Zboroshenko. He also filed a complaint with the court of the maintenance of his clients in the Izmailovo police department: he demands to admit that administrative detention was applied to all three. In addition, in relation to Mikhail Chistov, according to Zboroshenko, formal violations of the Code were committed: the protocol indicated that he was detained between nine and ten in the evening, and he was released only at five in the morning of the next day. Moreover, the 5th part of Art. 20.2 involves the detention for no more than three hours. Alexander Shcherbakov described the conditions of detention in the Department of Internal Affairs with these words: “We were not given a hot food or a place to sleep ... Deprivation of sleep, a room with non -compliance with the standards for the detainees, the lack of transmission with food, the provision of dry soldering instead of the law of hot diet, and only after 11 hours after delivery - this is already torture according to the ECHR norms”.