Yuri Dmitriev in the millstones of the judicial machine

It is becoming difficult to follow the judicial epic of the case of Yuri Dmitriev: courts of different instances follow one after another, bringing the situation ever closer to Kafkaesque absurdity. But still, the upcoming court hearing is special. We will not predict its outcome; however, the case will be considered for the first time outside of Karelia, where the “impossibility” of any decision in favor of Dmitriev is already too obvious. In anticipation of the meeting, a few words about it and what preceded it.

On February 16, 2021, the Third Court of Cassation in St. Petersburg will consider the cassation appeal against the appeal verdict handed down to Dmitriev on September 29, 2020 by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Karelia. The hearing will begin at 11:15, and only 45 minutes are allotted for consideration of the complaint in the court schedule. The hearing will be conducted by Sergei Zhernov , a criminal judge. Like all hearings in the case, this meeting will be closed; in addition, due to epidemic restrictions , only direct participants in the process will be allowed into the court. That is, in our case, only lawyer Viktor Anufriev. Dmitriev himself will participate in the meeting via video link. In 45 minutes, the fate of a historian who has written so much about the fates of other people, distorted by the repressive machine, can change greatly. Or stay the same, minus one more chance at justice.

At the moment, Yuri Dmitriev has been found guilty under Art. 132, part 4, paragraph b of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and was sentenced to 13 years in prison to be served in a maximum security colony. Charges under other articles (Articles 135 and 135, part 3; 222, part 1; 242, part 2) were sent for a new (third in a row!) consideration to the Petrozavodsk City Court. Only part of the decision was submitted for cassation on February 16 - the guilty verdict, which entered into force. Whether the second half of the verdict will be considered (sending part of the case for review, which in fact has already begun), depends on the decision of the judge.

This strange two-part verdict, the adequacy of which will be determined by the Third Court of Cassation of General Jurisdiction, was pronounced during the appellate review of the case. The details and circumstances of this review, logically, should become a compelling argument for overturning a court decision, which would be more accurately called extrajudicial. During the hearings, Yuri Dmitriev was deprived not only of qualified defense, but also of the opportunity to defend himself independently. His lawyer Viktor Anufriev petitioned to postpone the hearings for several days due to his illness, but the court did not meet him halfway, but instead appointed a new lawyer, Artyom Cherkasov. The new defender, unable to delve into the details of the case (he had only three days to study 19 volumes), without meeting with his client, did not oppose anything to the aggressive tactics of the court and only created the outward appearance of defense.

Dmitriev himself, despite requests for his personal presence in the conference room, was not allowed there. The audibility over the remote connection was such that he could not understand half of the words (especially considering the 25% hearing loss that was later diagnosed in him), and for every clarification of the question, the chairman of the panel of judges, Alla Rat, threatened to completely remove him from participation in the meeting. At lightning speed - in four days, without the approval of the expert organization and the team of specialists from the defense - a new examination of the photographs involved in the case was carried out. In this mode, the Supreme Court, in two sessions, overturned the verdict passed by the city court after a year and a half of careful study of the case, interviewing dozens of witnesses and experts.

Let us recall that six months ago, in July 2020, the Petrozavodsk City Court issued its verdict in the Dmitriev case. The historian was found not guilty of three charges: committing indecent acts (Articles 135 and 135, part 3), producing pornography (242, part 2), illegal possession of weapons (222, part 1); guilty - of committing acts of a sexual nature (Article 132, part 4, paragraph b), with a reduction in the sentence below the threshold established for this article. Of the sentence allotted to him—three and a half years—Dmitriev had four months left to serve. This decision was perceived by everyone as a hidden form of justification, which has recently become common in the practice of Russian courts in political cases. If it were not for the monstrous appeal verdict of the Supreme Court of Karelia, which overturned the entire work of the city court, Dmitriev would have been released three months ago. The September verdict of the Supreme Court of Karelia is unusual not only for the methods used by prosecutors and judges, but also for its unheard-of cruelty (the term was increased almost four times), as well as its absurdity: the third review of the case, to which the charges were sent with the acquittal overturned, makes it clear , that a serious failure was discovered in the judicial system of Karelia.

Now the case of Yuri Dmitriev will be considered in St. Petersburg - I want to believe that the levers of pressure on the court that were in effect in Petrozavodsk will not be valid here. Of course, in this case there are no guarantees that the court will treat the case with due impartiality, with attention to the materials presented for consideration, but there is still hope for this.

Irina Galkova, International Memorial