FSB brought Polozov’s lawyer from Umarov

The UFSB in the annexed Crimea and Sevastopol brought the lawyer Nikolai Polozov from the case of the deputy chairman of the Majlis of the Crimean Tatar people Ilmi Umarov, interrogating the lawyer as a witness in this case. Such information was reported to his FB page Simferopol lawyer Eden Semedlyaev. Now Polozov cannot represent the interests of Umerov: a person who are in any quality in the case do not have the right to protect his other persons.

As Mediazona conveyed with reference to Polozov himself, the FSB detained the lawyer on Wednesday by the day when he arrived in Simferopol. “Literally, when leaving the hotel, the investigators took the arms,” the lawyer said. “Culturally, that is, no one threw a face on the floor of the bus, but nevertheless I am limited in freedom of action.”

The security forces presented Polozov on the drive of a witness, which claimed that the lawyer "was in uncertainly refused to receive a summary of the call." However, the lawyer emphasized, the actions of the FSB are illegal, since the court decision on his interrogation as a witness in the case of Umarov will appeal and has not yet entered into legal force.

Polozova was delivered to the FSB. To provide legal assistance to the colleague, lawyer Semedlyaev went there. However, the attendant in the headquarters told the lawyer that the investigator Igor Skrip, who was conducting the case of Umarov, left, and he did not intend to find out which of the investigators is.

Meanwhile, the chairman of the Mejlis Refat Chubarov wrote that in reality Polozova was interrogating the violin along with the “traitor-revering” Vladimir Shevchenko.

As journalist Anton Naumluk reports , Polozov refused to answer questions from the security forces, drawing on a sheet A4 the poster "is silent in accordance with Article 8 of the Federal Law of 31.05.2002 No. 63-ФЗ and paragraph 2 of part 3 of Article 56 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation." The first of the norms that the lawyer referred to is an article "Law Secret" of the law on the advocacy. The second norm establishes that the lawyer is not subject to interrogation as a witness due to circumstances that became known to him in connection with the provision of legal assistance.

After the interrogation of Polozov, they released.

The investigator of the violin has tried to withdraw Polozov from the case of Umarov since the fall of last year. He submitted to Russia, the Kiev District Court of Simferopol, controlled by Russia on the interrogation of a lawyer as a witness, but the deputy chairman of the court Denis Didenko rejected the petition. Nevertheless, on November 8, the Russian Supreme Court of Crimea, on the proposal of the prosecutor's office, canceled this refusal and returned the paper for a new consideration.

On December 13, another judge of the Kiev District Court, Viktor Mozheleansky, satisfied the violin petition . He held a meeting in the absence of both Polozov himself and both of his lawyers - Oksana Zheleznyak and Sergey Legostov. At the same time, both Zheleznyak and Legostov notified the judge in writing that they could not arrive at the hearing, and asked to transfer the trial for another time.

In addition, Mozheleansky illegally closed the meeting from the public. At the same time, about a dozen representatives of the Crimean Tatar community, including Umarov himself, came to support Polozov.

The former Ukrainian judge Mozheleansky has made a number of unfinished decisions over the years after the annexation of Crimea. Among them are the verdict of the Euromaidan Alexander Kostenko, the extension of the arrests of the Politzami Akhtem Chiygoz and Vadim Siruk, the refusal to the complaint of journalist Lily Budzhurova against the actions of the FSB during a search in her house. The Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine opened against the Johelian business under Part 1 of Article 111 of the Criminal Code of the country (state treason), which provides for from 12 to 15 years in a colony with or without confiscation.

Against Umerov, the FSB fabricated the case under part 2 of Article 280.1 of the Russian Criminal Code (public calls for separatism through the media), which provides for up to five years of the colony. The policy is charged with a speech on March 19, 2016 with an interview on the air of the Crimean Tatar television channel ATR, which, after expulsion from Crimea, works in Kiev. It is claimed that the deputy chairman of the Mejlis "publicly called for the need to violate the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation."

Since May, Umarov has been under the recognizance not to leave. He does not admit guilt and refuses to testify.

Meanwhile, in mid -December, it became known that the violin intendsto include another episode in the business of Umarov , having charged a policy of Skype’s performance as part of the Svetly Crimea television on the air of the Kiev channel on December 10, 2015. In his two -minute speech, the deputy chairman of the Mejlis said that the problem of the return of Crimea to Ukraine cannot be solved by a military way, since the peninsula is flooded with the Russian military. The return of Crimea, the politician said, will contribute to the international isolation of Russia, the drop in oil prices, as well as the civil blockade of the peninsula. Umarov also called on Ukrainians not to refuse Crimea. “Normal citizens of Ukraine must understand that Crimea is an integral part of Ukraine and it is worth fighting for it,” he emphasized.

On Tuesday, KrymSOS said with reference to lawyer Emil Kurbedinov, who also defends Umarova that on January 27, the investigator of the violin intends to file a policy of the new edition. In turn, Aisha Umarova, the daughter of the deputy chairman of the Mejlis, did not exclude that the episode with the participation of the Light Crimea will enter the new decision to attract as the accused.