The Kalininsky District Court in Chelyabinsk ignored the decision of the ECHR, according to which the preventive measure for journalist of the newspaper “Public Defender” Dmitry Gromovy should be changed. This was reported by the Memorial project. Support for political prisoners."
In July 2020, in Chelyabinsk, local drug control officers detained Gromovoy. At that time, the journalist was investigating the involvement of the Chelyabinsk Region Drug Control Department in the operation of online drug stores.
According to investigators, Gromovoy was supposed to purchase and package drugs, make “bookmarks,” and then post photographs of places with “bookmarks” on the “SELL YOU BUY” website. Between July 24 and July 27, 2020, the journalist purchased narcotic substances and made 19 stashes, which formed the basis for charges of 20 counts. In addition, during a search in the journalist’s apartment, security forces also discovered substances. According to the defense, the drugs were planted in Gromovy’s apartment.
Gromovy is charged with a total of 20 counts of attempted crime not completed (Part 3 of Article 30 of the Criminal Code) and illegal sale of drugs in a significant amount via the Internet by prior conspiracy (clause “a” and clause “ b" part 3 of article 228.1).
On July 31, 2020, Gromovoy was sent to a pre-trial detention center. On October 13, 2021, the ECHR issued a decision according to which the case against the journalist is based on conjectures and assumptions, and the detention in the pre-trial detention center lasts too long. In addition, Gromovy was awarded compensation of 9,750 euros. At the same time, the Kalininsky District Court of Chelyabinsk, which is considering Gromovoy’s case, considered that the ECHR decision is not a sufficient basis for changing the preventive measure.
Defender Alla Dunaeva told the Memorial project. Support for political prisoners”, that this precedent is “the first in Russia when, after the ECHR made a decision of this kind, the preventive measure in the form of detention was not changed.” This may be explained by the fact that, as a rule, at the time of the ECHR decision, the court of first instance has already passed a verdict, but in the Gromovy case this has not yet happened.
Gromovoy himself connects his persecution with his professional activities. In addition to investigative journalism, he was involved in protecting the rights of victims from law enforcement agencies.