Back to cockroaches in soup

Enver Bekirov

“Here are signatures, and here are copies of passports, so that no one would think that these people do not exist,” explains the wife of one of the arrested Crimean Tatars to his lawyer. More than a hundred fellow villagers of all nationalities signed a positive testimonial against suspected terrorist Enver Bekirov.

However, the prudently collected copies of passports were not needed - the appellate judge Yuri Latynin already believed in the authenticity of the document, which, however, did not in the least affect his verdict. Bekirov, like the three others arrested in this case, remained in custody at least until April 9.

During the meeting, which lasted no more than twenty minutes, the defendant’s lawyer Emil Kurbedinov explained that in the first instance the decision was made solely based on the severity of the crime charged. And although charges have not yet been brought, the article on “terrorism” does not scare many people. This is probably why the lawyer Poluyanova, who was appointed as a defender, disowned Bekirov, who, according to the judge, “could not be found” for several days before the hearing.

The lawyer hired under the contract, unlike the “appointed” one, appeared. And he did everything in his power - he provided positive references from his neighbors, explained why he considered the decision of the first instance court to be illegal, and asked the court to change the measure of restraint to house arrest. Bekirov himself also supported this request, citing health problems, which few people have in their fifties.

After this, a representative of the prosecution spoke, who read out from the paper the standard cliche from the prosecutor’s office in such situations - the preventive measure is justified, there are no grounds for review, there are no health contraindications for detention in a pre-trial detention center. Five minutes later, the fate of not only Bekirov, but also his three comrades in misfortune became clear - the Supreme Court of Crimea upheld the decision of the first instance, and left his appeal without satisfaction. There was no doubt that the same sentence would be given to the rest of the defendants in the case.

Vadim Siruk

Without delay, Judge Latynin proceeded to consider the second appeal against Vadim Siruk. The defendant, however, had to be called out all the time - he hastily wrote a refusal from a state-appointed lawyer named Konyashkin, who not only did not appear for the appeal, but also did not consider it necessary to challenge the decision of the trial court at all.

In the same sequence, the lawyer hired by agreement, and then his client, drew attention to the facts that were not taken into account when choosing a preventive measure - Vadim Siruk is officially employed, all his relatives live in Crimea, he will not hide anywhere, because he has a a dependent young child and a pregnant wife for whom he is the only breadwinner. In the same way, the prosecutor read the same phrase from a piece of paper by rote - the measure of restraint is justified, there are no grounds for review, there are no health contraindications for detention in a pre-trial detention center.

Three minutes later, the judge read out his verdict from a paper that was apparently printed in advance - the Supreme Court of Crimea upheld the decision of the first instance, and left the complaint of lawyer Siruk without satisfaction. On the back bench, the pregnant wife of the arrested man, wrapped in a Muslim headscarf, began to sob quietly.

Muslim Aliyev

After the convoy took away Enver Bekirov and Vadim Siruk, two more defendants in the criminal case were brought to their place - Alushta resident Muslim Aliyev and Yalta human rights activist Emir-Usein Kuku. Both, before the judge appeared, began to say that there was a quiet horror going on in the pre-trial detention center - cockroaches were swimming in the food, huge bedbugs and mites were in the bed linen, and the cells themselves were overcrowded: half of the cell was sleeping, and the other was waiting for its turn.

The narration of prison difficulties was interrupted by the appearance of the judge. The consideration of the appeals of these prisoners was conducted by Judge Sergei Pogrebnyak. At his first question about challenges to the court, the lawyer or the prosecution, Aliyev really wanted to express distrust of the entire justice system, but after consultation with the lawyer he restrainedly said that so far there were no grounds for challenges. The state-appointed lawyer named Akulenko was also retained, despite his absence “due to illness.”

After this, the lawyer appointed by agreement submitted references and even thanks for inclusion in the case, as well as a complaint about the conditions of detention in the pre-trial detention center. The prosecution opposed the inclusion, especially regarding the conditions in prison, but the judge, to the surprise of those present, included the submitted documents both times.

Both the lawyer and his client drew the court’s attention to the fact that in the criminal case in which Aliyev is a defendant, there are no victims or witnesses. This was confirmed at the trial court by a representative of the investigative authorities. In this regard, there is no reason to keep him in custody for the reason that he can put pressure on witnesses and victims. How can we assume that he will escape, since Muslim turned out to be the largest of those arrested - he has four children in his family, including his eldest disabled daughter .

Aliyev emphasized that he considers the criminal case fabricated to intimidate the Crimean Tatar people, and explained his involvement in it through active social activities, which they are now trying to present as terrorist.
The position of the prosecution remained unchanged: “the preventive measure is justified, there are no grounds for review, there are no health contraindications for detention in a pre-trial detention center,” the representative of the prosecutor’s office again read from the piece of paper. Judge Pogrebnyak also expressed solidarity on this issue, as expected, upholding the verdict of the first instance.

Emir-Usein Kuku

The only suspect whose state-appointed lawyer came to defend him was Yalta social activist Emir-Usein Kuku. At the stage of introducing materials, the defense insisted on including in the case information about violations committed during the search and detention of the defendant. Law enforcement officers handcuffed the suspect, in which he remained for about five hours while the search lasted, deprived him of the opportunity to call a lawyer so that he could be present at the search and later during the arrest, and were also not allowed to perform namaz.

Despite the fact that the prosecutor's office opposed it, the judge favorably allowed these materials to be included. After this, the lawyer Kurbedinov, appointed under the contract, brought to the attention of the court that Kuku is a human rights activist, had conflicts with representatives of the FSB, who even tried to kidnap him, and suggested that his “involvement” in the activities of a terrorist organization was explained precisely by this.
After this, the appointed lawyer Ilya Pivovarov examined all the grounds that, according to the explanations of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, may exist when choosing a preventive measure in the form of detention. The main idea was that the court had no reason to consider Kuku guilty, and the prosecution’s arguments about the possibility of putting pressure on the investigation and the desire to escape were called insignificant by the defense attorney.

However, in the end, the chances of the defendants and their lawyers to achieve the truth in the appellate instance turned out to be negligible. All four suspects will spend at least another month in the pre-trial detention center, and as practice shows, they will most likely be kept in captivity until the preliminary investigation is completed.