Udaltsov will sit

The court in the Tambov region refused to Sergey Udaltsov in parole

The storyteller of the Tambov region refused to be early release from the colony by the Coordinator of the Left Front Sergey Udaltsov, who is serving a sentence for organizing riots in Bolotnaya Square in Moscow in May 2012. According to the court, Udaltsov did not take the path of correction, as evidenced by the negative characteristic from the colony administration.

Sergey Udaltsov was refused: 3 reprimands not removed, 2 schizo, 3 conversations do not indicate that he took the path of correction.

- Violetta Volkova (@volkova_v) March 29, 2016

Sergei Udaltsov, sentenced by the Moscow City Court, to 4.5 years in prison , received the right to petition on parole last year, but the narrative court began the application for its application only in January. The Plenum of the Supreme Court of Russia has what such a delay explains what such a delay is explained and what the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Russia has, on the eve of the hearing in the storyteller, in an interview with Radio, Liberty told Sergei Udaltsova Violetta Volkov .

- When the deadline came up, Sergey was still in the investigative insulator in Moscow, and we were already preparing to submit all these documents here, but he was very promptly sent to serve his sentence. Accordingly, while he arrived, while quarantine passed there, while we found out where he was located, time passed.

He is not Evgenia Vasiliev, who 10 days after being in the colony gave all the necessary recommendations , positive characteristics and the conclusion that it can be applied to it. Therefore, Sergey decided to wait a bit with a motion so that the leadership of the colony could get to know him, to understand whether it was ready to maintain a request for parole or not ready. Some time passed, and we filed at UDO, but, unfortunately, our application was left without consideration. And neither I was informed about this, nor Sergey. On the phone, they told us that they did not see who they were talking to, and refused to provide information, we found it in the electronic office on the court website only in January - so it was cunningly hidden.

So we learned that our complaint would not be considered, and immediately prepared another package of documents, deciding that it would be more rational to file a new request than to appeal the previous court decision and lose several months. This time the case came to another judge, and after a short time we learned that it was accepted for production, and then we waited for all the necessary procedures. The thing is that in the case of consideration of the request for UDO, victims are always notified. In our case, the court should be inquired by the opinion of almost hundreds of people, all those people who came to our process, whether they agree with parole, whether they believe that it can be applied. Such letters are not necessary to answer, but they must be sent to all victims.

-Do you already know the opinion of the victims and the colony administration about the parole of Sergei Udaltsov, did they support your request?

- We will learn about this directly in the process of considering the petition and then we will understand what is happening there. For example, I know that recently Sergey received a term in a schizo (penalty area. - RS) for completely, in my opinion, normal actions that should not have entails the punishment. And given that before that Sergey was brought to disciplinary liability, the characteristic may be negative.

Most of these penalties are absurd. For example, the prisoner has only one change of clothing. And this clothing should be clean. If the clothes are dirty - this is a violation, but you can wash only on a strictly defined day, at a strictly defined time. Sergey washed his clothes at the wrong time that was provided for this, and received a penalty. It was shot on the proposal of the prosecutor, who considered that it was better to violate so than walking dirty. Therefore, he asked to remove this punishment from him. Sergey has a punishment for a not quite evenly covered bed and for the fact that once in the summer he put the slippers untimely. After some time, Sergey was sick there, got used to the local order, I realized that it was possible, that it was impossible, went to work and tried not to receive any penalties, but the last time I surpassed all the previous ones. The administration considered a violation to leave the workplace to the toilet. Six minutes that he was absent in the workplace were sufficient to attract him to 10 days in a schizo.

Although the Supreme Court says that the penalties should not impede the use of UDO, our judicial system is not as flexible as the Supreme Court, which describes this in the plenums of all this. Therefore, the situation is ambiguous, let's see how it all looks.

- Some time ago, the former Commissioner for Human Rights Ella Pamfilova in her report noted that the employees of her apparatus went to the colony, in particular, to Sergei Udaltsov, in the colony near Razvozhaev. They were puzzled by the question of why, on one day, two people who are in different parts of the country made exactly the same penalties. As I understand it, it was about the first placement in the penalty area in October 2015.

- Yes.

- And the employees of the apparatus of the Commissioner for Human Rights suggested that the penalties were aimed at imposing the possible receipt of Udaltsov and Razvozzhaevo. Do you agree with such conclusions?

- My colleague Dmitry Agranovsky (Leonid Razvozzhaev’s lawyer also represents Sergei Udaltsov’s interests in the European Human Rights Court. - RS) This is exactly what we see and understand, because there is no other explanation for this. This is done at once and-such a feeling-according to someone’s order. Previously, the court has always paid attention to how many sentences the convict has. And even if, for example, the colony itself supported the application for UDO, then usually the prosecutor acted categorically against, justifying his position by the fact that the prisoner has more than two penalties. Accordingly, it has not been corrected, and therefore it is too early to apply parole to it. Despite the fact that these penalties could be obtained several years ago. And it is extremely rare that the court is contrary to the opinion of the prosecutor. Accordingly, we believed that, most likely, this is the same situation when a large number of punishments are being developed for Udaltsov and Razvozhaev, in order to subsequently prevent them from receiving parole. Then a decree of the Plenum (the Supreme Court of Russia. - RS) came out, which said that the number of punishments should not affect the consideration of the corresponding issue. But we will see how the narrative court will look at the number of penalties that Udaltsov received, in my opinion, ridiculous and stupid.

-But in addition to the penalties, there is another possible obstacle to the premiums - to the non-recognition of guilt, for which, despite the explanations of both the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court of Russia, judges of the district courts still love to refuse to be refused to be early liberation. From your point of view, can Sergey Udaltsov’s position now, who does not find himself guilty of organizing riots in Bolotnaya Square, prevent him from getting parole?

- Of course, subjectively, the court can take this into account, but in this way the judicial act will not be justified, because if the refusal of UDO is based on the fact that Udaltsov does not plead guilty, this decision is unequivocally abolished. And if not a court of second instance, then a higher court of cassation or supervisory instance will make an appropriate conclusion. And such a decision will be canceled as clearly illegal and violating all the establishments that the Supreme Court made on this issue, says Violetta Volkov.