Mufti on the reservation

The defendants of the Crimean “case on February 26” Mustafa Deggermmenji and Ali Asanov, acting in the process of the deputy chairman of the Medzhlis of the Crimean Tatar people Akhtem Chiygoz, the materials in respect of which were allocated from the main “case on February 26” in separate production, said that the Mufti of Crimea Emirali Abilayev convinced them of the deputy chairman of the Mejlis. For this, Mufti promised, Degermendi and Asanov will be released from the pre -trial detention center for his guarantee.

Information about the speech of Degermendzhi was reported by the lawyer of Chiygoz Nikolay Polozov during a break in the case on Monday in the Supreme Court of the annexed Crimea. The video recording of the message was published on his FB page by the chairman of the CEC Kurulti of the Crimean Tatar people Zair Smedlyaev.

A conversation with Ablaev, said Degermmenji, took place in the premises of the TFR. Prior to this, the investigator unsuccessfully tried to get both the guilt and testimonies against Chiygoz. The conversation with the muft, however, did not shake the position of Degermmenji - he did not give testimony either for himself or other accused.

During the interrogation on Monday, Politsyk said that Chiygoz at the Euromaidan rally did not see the Crimea Verkhovna Rada and did not know about his actions. He also did not meet people who would give any teams to the protesters. In addition, Degermmenji noted that the Euromaidanists did not take any aggressive actions, while participants in the pro -Russian countermilling, which also took place from the Crimean parliament, made provocations.

Later, "Crimean" wrote with reference to Polozov that he also gave similar testimony asanov. Like Degermendzhi, Asanov said that he had talked with Ablaev in the TFR and refused his proposal. “He also said that the matter is not in Akhtemus Chiygoz,” Polozov added. “If any other person was in his place, he would still not give any testimony, because it is not true.”

Asanov also confirmed that I did not see Chiygoz at the rally, but did not hear any calls for aggressive actions. Meanwhile, the political prisoner added, just just the anti -Maidanists behaved. “One of the pro -Russian protesters threw a bottle into Asanov and fell into his head,” said Polozov. “The other protesting during the tiger sprayed gas from the balonchik into his eyes.”

The refusal of Asanov and Degermmenji testimony against Chiygoz, despite the promises of liberation from the pre -trial detention center, was reported in the fall of 2015. However, that such proposals came not only from the investigator, but also from Ablaev, for the first time became known only now.

Meanwhile, last fall, the mufti of the Crimea, which was previously criticized for collaboration, was also convicted of informing . The network published a statement by Ablaev in the FSB, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the prosecutor's office. The paper stated that in the eight jamaats of the peninsula, followers of the Hizb Ut -Tahrir prevail, and in four others, supporters of the Khabashites.

The Crimean Tatar public already after the annexation began to express distrust to Ablaev and his mufti. On November 20, 2016 , a new spiritual department of Muslims of Crimea , independent of the invaders, was formed in Kiev. The mufti was chosen by Aider Rustamov.

Hearing on the merits of the Ciygoz case has been continuing since August last year . The process is carried out by the collegium as part of Viktor Zinkov (chairman), Alexei Kozyrev and Igor Kryuchkov. Part 1 of Article 212 of the Russian Criminal Code (organization of mass riots), the deputy chairman of the Mejlis threatens from 8 to 15 years in the colony. Chiigoz since January 2015 has been contained in the Simferopol SIZO-1. He does not admit guilt.

On January 31 of this year, the head of the Crimean occupation administration Sergei Aksenov, who participated in the rally of Antimaydanists on February 26, acted as a witness at the trial. He testified confirming the charge. Chiygoz and his defense insisted on demonstrating the officials of videos from the rally, refuting his testimony, but the judicial collegium rejected the petition.

The trial on the merits of the main "case on February 26" was opened in November in the Central District Court of Simferopol, controlled by Russia. The hearing is conducted by Judge Sergey Demenok. In addition to Degermmenji and Asanov, also imprisoned in the pre-trial detention center-1, three more defendants in free under the guarantee: Eskender Kantemirov, Eskender Emirvaliev and Arsen Yunusov. All five are charged with part 2 of Article 212 of the Criminal Code of Russia (participation in riots), which provides for from 3 to 8 years of the colony.

Degermmenji and Asanov completely deny the guilt. Emirvaliev and Yunusov recognize participation in a fight, but reject the accusation of riots. Kantemirov initially adhered to the same position, however, at the hearing on February 5, he petitioned for the allocation of materials in relation to himself in a separate production and consideration of them in a special order . Such a measure can be applied only if the sane guilt is found. Judge Demenok, however, rejected the petition.

The “February 26 case” was fabricated in the first half of 2015. A year earlier, on February 26, 2014, the protests of the Maidanites, most of whom were the Crimean Tatars, tore off the voting in the Verkhovna Rada of Crimea on the appointment of an illegal separatist referendum. The reason for the initiation of the case was clashes between the supporters of the Euromaidan and the participants in the rally of pro -Russian forces, at the same time passed by the parliament. According to the Russian prosecutor's office of the peninsula, during these clashes, "two people died, 79 bodily harm of varying severity were caused."

The first process in the case began in December 2015, but already in February last year, the judges returned the materials to the prosecutor's office. At the preliminary hearings in the framework of the repeated process, Judge Zinkov shared the case, leaving materials for Chiygoz in the region’s court, and transferring the rest to the district court. He explained this decision to different jurisdiction of cases in parts 1 and 2 of Article 212 of the Criminal Code. However, the defense of the defendants is sure that in this way Zinkov decided to make it easier for himself.