№ 203 (3145)

24.12.2005

An old case - a new jury

For the first time in the jurisprudence of Tatarstan a sentence based on the verdict of the jury was thrown out. To tell the truth, the panel of judges for criminal cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation does not have any claims for the judges of the fact. The instance of cessation considered that the chairman of the court supported the prosecution notwithstanding the requirements of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

We remind you that the jury trial about 12 assumed accomplices of the tatar-kirghiz drugs-traffic started in the Supreme Court on the 8 of April. On the 16 of May the jury found the defendants guilty on all counts (contraband, selling of the narcotics and so on), on the 24 of May the court sentenced them to different periods of imprisonment: from two and a half years of a common regime - for the women, who transported heroin from Osh to Kazan. To 12 years of the strict regime - for an organizer of a part of the criminal gang in the capital of Tatarstan. Vigorously rejecting the sentence, the lawyers of the defendants started to look for a defence in Moscow, referring in their appeal to the fact that the trial had an accusatory character from the beginning, and that the chairman ignored the evidence of the defence.

The instance of cassation agreed with almost all the arguments of the lawyers. So, it was admitted, for example, that the chairman on this trial - the judge of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan Pavel Kondratyev, appealing to the jury, practically formulated the indictment against the defendants. Moreover by definition of the instance of cassation, the chairman did not give proper weight to the many remarks made by the parties under cross examination?) After he noticed some corrections in the question lists, already filled in by the jury, He did not consult the court, but handed out new lists

A special punishment from the Supreme Court of Tatarstan felt the state prosecutor of the Russian Federation Alexander Apollonov. During the trial he introduced such concepts as "organized criminal band", "contraband" Thus giving a juridical estimation to the defendants` activities in that way. In his concluding speech before the jury he also" supplied the information diminishing the defence", making some statements "detracting" from its position, alluding to the Bible and the Koran, He "referred to the complications, the law enforcement met during the investigation". The defence and the Supreme Court of Russia also did not like that the state prosecutor "allowed expressions on the edge of judicial ethics, for example:"...Everything what the lawyer said... is his own fantasy and guess-work", or "...The lawyer has just... modestly left or "The lawyer with the tender emotion of delight on her face... ".

Getting a "very poor" mark from the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the job (which was celebrated by the General Office of Public prosecutors at a major success as the first victory of the Tatar law over the international drug mafia) the Tatar Office of Public prosecutors did not idly wait for the return case to the Supreme Court of Tatarstan. Alexander Appolonov has already given an account to the Supreme Court, where he stated all his arguments. The General prosecutor could, in his opinion, appeal against the decision of the cassation instance in the supervisory order. Providing that the chairman did not make breaches during the trial Apollonov appealed only to the Criminal Code. Yet the state prosecutor had to look for the arguments for himself also in a dictionary - to explain of the meanings of the words "to decrease", "to detract" and "to refer".

In Alexander Apollonov opinion, none of his statements, which hurt the defence, does not detract its position, because the word "to detract" means "to belittle, to depreciate, to derogate". The state prosecutor also thinks that on the contrary the defence often allowed unethical statements against him. For example: "the defence definitively could not bring him (the witness - E.M.) to the mark... So there is a trap, but no bait so that, what he really had, and the prosecution has is a molehill instead of a mountain."

Apollonov denies that he alluded to the Bible and the Koran, and explains that he just mentioned these holy books to make his speech picturesque:"...the witnesses... repeated memorized as "Our Father" and surahs from Koran..." The law does not forbid appealing to the hearts of the jury with words, using aphorisms and sayings published in officially permitted editions.

Till the matter is resolved over the supervisory authority the case about "the international drug mafia syndicate", returning from Moscow, will be handed to another judge. It is more likely that after the new years` holidays a new jury for the old case will be formed in the Supreme Court of Tatarstan. But if the appeal will be satisfied by the supervisory instance, the trial will be stopped at any moment (even while pronouncing a sentence of not guilty!) and the sentence passed in May will automatically be admitted as legal.

Elena MELNIK.