“Did you say? She said. Herself? Herself"

The ECHR did not find violations in one of the most high-profile processes of the early 2000s

“The verdict pronounced by the Zytornik, who found her guilty of preparing for a terrorist act, as well as the declension of other persons to perform the attack, is based on many certificates, including the results of forensic experts, as well as hidden videos made by the police (in accordance with the court decision), and the testimony that V. and K. gave in the open process ... from the point of view, there is a significant volume Explosive evidence, ”the ECHR decision says.

The case of Zara Murtazalieva, if you remember, was famous in human rights circles. This was, as always, about the “bloody regime”, which substituted an innocent Chechen girl. I myself thought and wrote so then, including this text, including - this is a belated apology.

Chechenka Zara Murtazalieva arrived in Moscow in 2003. In the mosque, she met two Russian girls who accepted Islam, began to live with them in the same apartment and constantly explain Aishat and Fatima (as Anya and Dasha were now called) about jihad, told how great it is to become a suicide bomber, climbed with them on jihadist sites and supplied them with the abundance of appropriate video and textual products.

Since the apartment in which future martyrs lived was kindly rented for Murtazalieva from the supply of her compatriot A. (Saida Akhmayev), who served in Russian law enforcement agencies, there was video and audio equipment in it, writing the entire process of “humanization”.

On March 3, Zara Murtazalieva informed her wards that she had just called a person who came to Moscow to “blow himself up”, and also said that if something happens to her, it would be necessary to clean the apartment from Islamic literature and call my mother in Chechnya.

Apparently, having heard this, the operatives decided to act. The next day, Zaru Murtazaliev “Zeal” at the Vernadsky Prospekt metro station, supposedly during a routine audit. In her handbag, two explosives wrapped in foil were found, which, most likely, was thrown by the opera themselves. In any case, I cannot imagine any other reason why these pieces could be there. If the accomplice handed over the murtasalia explosive device, then it would be an explosive device: with wires, a detonator, etc. Why transmit just pieces of explosives?

In any case, the main evidence was not explosives, but the recordings of the conversations on which the recruiter washed the brains of Russian fools, the testimonies of the fools themselves, as well as six photographs of the escalator in the "Okhotny Ryad" shopping center, which, according to the accusation, Zara Murtazalieva were about to blow up.

This accusation - unlike explosives bars, which Russian operatives are usually thrown by the suspect in terrorism - looks very serious. In any case, I have no explanation why the girl who praised Jihad’s charms is so diligent to photograph this escalator.

The arrest of Murtazalieva in those, Vegetarian, for years, caused the righteous anger of an enlightened public. A whole storm rose in the media. The best feathers of Russia exposed the bloody regime, which threw the bars of TNT with an innocent Chechen, who only did what she lived in a rented apartment with two, who accepted the peaceful Islamic religion Anya and Dasha and told them about the atrocities of the Russians in Chechnya.

A distinctive feature of this noble anger was that none of the indignant even had to quote in reports from the trial of court, which Murtazalieva said to Russian girls. The ethics of many Russian human rights activists at that time (and now) suggests that you can get acquainted only with the version of lawyers, and everything else is aiding the bloody regime.

At the trial, Murtazalieva’s lawyers said that the records were deciphered incorrectly. The court listened to the original. There were no objections. Everything turned out to be deciphered correctly. Murtazalieva Dali was 8.5 years, which she served from the call to the call. The Memorial recognized her political prisoner. Amnesty International was busy about her release. Freed, she left for France, where her book was published about the bloody regime and an innocent girl.

And now such an Afront - the ECHR refused the complaint.

What do you think, what did Murtazaliev’s complaint filed? The fact that she was attributed to non -existent conversations? What did Dasha and Anya specify her? On a bunch of all sorts of nonsense, which are not in the sentence, but who, with fervor, exposed her lawyers, at a time proved that the case, fabricated by werewolves in uniform, is wise with white threads?

Not at all. The complaint concerned three points.

Firstly, Zara Murtazalieva complained that, I quote: "The objectivity of the trial was violated that she could not see in the hall of the video screen, on which the video films received during the surveillance operation were projected."

The Russian side, in turn, stated that: a) beyond the limitation of time it is impossible to say exactly where the screen stood in the courtroom and whether Ms. Murtazaliev really could not see him, b) that after demonstrating the film, Ms. Murtazalieva noticed that “she sees nothing illegal in her,” from which she still saw her, and c) that neither the lady of Murtasalia, she did not notice her lawyers. this glaring violation during the process.

The ECHR agreed with these arguments of the Russian side and, moreover, unanimously noted that even if Ms. Murtazaliev could not actually see a video screen, this did not prevent her from monitoring the process of the process. The court also drew attention to the fact that Ms. Murtazalieva did not deny that the records were genuine, she only claimed that the decoding of conversations was inaccurate. That is why she asked to announce the audio of these conversations in court. After listening to audio in court, she did not find inaccuracies.

Ms. Murtazalieva also claimed in her complaint that her rights were violated that she could not interrogate the apartment of the Chechen operative and two witnesses, in which TNT was taken out of her handbag. In a complaint in the ECHR, she stated that the operative was a provocateur and that the whole thing was the result of his actions.

The ECHR did not agree here, deciding that Ms. Murtazalieva was conducted by the conversations, and, in addition, expressed surprise that Murtazalieva’s lawyers did not put forward such claims in the Russian court. “The applicant began to claim that A. allegedly provoked her to participate in a crime only in his comments before this court,” the ECHR noted.

It is difficult for me to say to what extent the decision of the ECHR is dictated by terrorist attacks on the embankment in Nice and in the Bataklan Theater. But for me, this decision is curious in that it shows how the public opinion has changed about the peaceful religion of Islam as a whole, and Chechnya in particular in recent years.

However, one must think that the decision of the ECHR does not face any troubles living in France in France. In the end, in the West there are many representatives of the peaceful Islamic religion, which suffered from bloody infidels. Several such victims, former prisoners of Guantanamo, the government of Tony Blair even paid 1 million pounds of compensation. Recently, one of them-Abu-Carrians of Al-Britan-exploded, fighting in Syria on the side of ISIS (an organization banned in the Russian Federation).