Chaban and two Ivan

In a difficult battle with Safronov and Pavlov, investigator Chaban made his lunge

The “security forces” hone the methods of combating the lawyer: from the stupid “Fortress Plan”, when they simply do not miss anyone to the detainees, to the two -traders invented by the FSB investigators to neutralize the specific lawyer Ivan Pavlov in the specific case of Ivan Safronov.

An ordinary reception of the investigation has long been an interrogation of a lawyer regarding some actions of his client: a guarantee of a lawyer secret does not apply to circumstances that are not directly related to the case in which the defense is carried out, but the questioned lawyer can no longer participate in it. And the combination against Pavlov was built in the reverse order: first (in April), the case was opened against him under Art. 310 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for “disclosing the data of the preliminary investigation”, and last week, as just reported on the Instagram “Channel of the Dog Pavlov”, Safronov was interrogated as a witness in the Pavlov case. The “new” “monsters” of the advocacy of such precedents could not recall.

Formally, Pavlov is not forbidden to participate in Safronov, but if he comes to that in Lefortovo, he will violate the “ban on communicating with a witness” and may be under house arrest. A more stringent preventive measure for accusations under Art. 310 cannot be applied, but this will exclude the further work of Pavlov for several months for this and other matters.

Another defender of Safronov from the “Team-29”, which participated in his interrogation in the Pavlov case, has no right to tell about his content in order not to receive the charge under the same Art. 310 of the Criminal Code. But this does not deprive us of the right to fantasize on this subject on their own.

We know that the accusation of Pavlov concerns two episodes that took place in December of the past and in March of this year: the transfer of the “Vedomosti” copies of the decision to attract Safronov as the accused and the story to reporters that a certain witness appeared under the pseudonym. Neither the first nor the second of these episodes of the Safrons, all this time in strict isolation in Lefortovo, cannot have a relationship. What could he tell Pavlov, what would he himself did not know from the same materials of the case?

Pavlov is also a very sophisticated lawyer, and he, of course, will appreciate the witty move of his procedural enemy. But

Safronov will insist precisely on his participation in his business, and Pavlov will feng on (and his divert can be regarded as depriving Safronov’s right to defense).

Pavlov is forbidden to use the means of communication, and we are deprived of the opportunity to clarify his plans directly, but perhaps he will turn to the investigator with a request to explain in writing how to defend Safronov further. The investigator, most likely, “turn on the fool” and will refer to the court, which chose Pavlov such a preventive measure (it seemed strange until the next move was made). Then Pavlov will go to court and ask this measure to modify - to remove the ban on communication specifically with his client Safronov.

The court, who hardly wants to come into conflict with the FSB, will somehow get out of this situation, although here you have to break your head. But regardless of his decision, the same interrogation of Safronov (in the case of Pavlov) will have to “surfacing” in this judicial dispute. But what if it turns out that the interrogation was purely formal? This will indicate that his only goal was to knock Pavlov out of the case. Then this combination, which can be called elegant, or can be called Jesuit (it all depends on the point of view), can already be qualified as abuse of official powers by the investigator (Article 235 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).