Baku Grave Crimes Court passed sentence for the 12 accused on so-called Nardaran-3
|+ 4 more man|
Analysis of offenses at the trial of case “Nardaran-3”
Baku Grave Crimes Court
Case 1(101)-247/2017December 6, 2017
Presiding Judge:Zeynal Aghayev
Public Prosecutors: Ali Aliyev, Orkhan Kangarli
Accused: Zulfugar Mikayilov, Faig Allahverdiyev, Ali Huseynov, Mehman Guliyev, Mehman Mammadov, Eldar Bunyadov, Elman Aghayev, Elkhan Hasanov, Ramil Seyfullayev, Mubariz Ibrahimov, Ruzi Ismayilov, Jabir Aliyev
Defenders: Ramiz Mammadov, Zibeyda Sadighova, Rashad Jabrayilov, Elkhan Shukurov, Asli Mammadova, Khavar Ismayilova, Reyhan Amirova, Rustam Zulfugarov, Akif Aliyev, Shahla Humbatova, Bahruz Bayramov
Victim: Ogtay Orujev
The settlement of Nardaran, located 40km from Baku, has a low standard of living and an acute unemployment problem. At the same time it is in Nardaran that one of the most revered by the Shiites mosques, founded in the VIII century, is located. Nardaran differs from other Baku villages by its religiosity. In 2000, 2002 and 2006, the villagers conducted peaceful protests with socio- economic demands. In June of 2002 the police conducted a military operation in the settlement as a result of which 28 people were injured, one died. 23 people were sentenced to various terms of imprisonment on falsified charges of espionage in favour of Iran, an attempt to forcefully change the government, etc. However, as a result of the active work of human rights defenders, none of the convicts remained in custody after 2005.
On November 26, 2015 another police operation was held in Nardaran. The police armed with automatic weapons, entered the settlement and opened heavy fire. As a result, 6 people were killed, including two police officers. Dozens of citizens were arrested. The Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) and the Prosecutor General’s Office issued a joint statement explaining the use of firearms against villagers as an operation necessary to neutralize a criminal armed group that functioned under a religious cover and planned mass riots, terrorist acts and destabilization of the socio-political situation in the country.
People in detention under the Nardaran case are divided into 4 groups: the first group Nardaran 1, which included the chairman of the movement Muslim Unity Taleh Baghirov and 17 other people, who were sentenced to long terms of imprisonment on July 20, 2017; the second group Nardaran 2, which included the chairman of the Board of the Muslim Unity movement Elchin Gasimov and 11 others, who were sentenced to long terms of imprisonment on December 28, 2017; the third group Nardaran 3, which included a scholar-theologian Zulfugar Mikayilov and 11 people, sentence was passed on December 6, 2017. It should be noted that the trial of the fourth Nardaran 4 group is still ongoing in the Baku Grave Crimes Court (accused under the case are Elkhan Isgandarov and Abulfaz Bunyadov). The trial of the group Nardaran 3 lasted from January 17, 2017 to December 6, 2017. Among the accused are a theological scholar Zulfugar Mikayilov and 11 others. According to the indictment, since 2015 the accused, in particular Zulfugar Mikayilov, as part of the unregistered organization Muslim Unity under the leadership of Taleh Baghirov (accused in the Nardaran 1), committed acts aimed at forcible change of the state system, an attempt to create a religious state managed by Shariah, made public calls for terrorism and mass riots, as well as committed other serious crimes.
At the preparatory meeting, the lawyers appealed to the court with motions to dismiss the criminal case against their clients and change the preventive measures in the form of arrest for an alternative measure not related to the arrest. The motions were rejected. During the trial on the merits, the defendants told about the tortures in custody during the investigation, how they were forced to confess to the incriminated crimes under tortures, how the police operation in Nardaran was conducted on November 26 2015, how the policemen shot 6 people, including two police officers. In the course of the trial, the witnesses of the prosecution’s side were officers of the Main Department for Combating Organized Crime of the Azerbaijan MIA Emin Safarov, Khatam Aliyev and Elshan Jamalov. They testified on the episode of Zulfugar Mikayilov’s arrest. Emin Safarov testified that during the detention of Z.Mikayilov, weapons were found with him. He also showed that during the search in the Mikailov’s house 2 explosives, 2 explosive igniters and a book of treatment by Taleh Baghirov were discovered.
Z.Mikayilov completely refuted these testimonies and said that he had no explosives in his house. At the next court hearing, lawyer Akif Aliyev appealed to the court with a motion to call and interrogate as witnesses a chief of Lankaran Region Executive Power Taleh Garashev, former chief of Police Department of Lankaran region (PDLR) Mohabbat Huseynov, the former deputy of former chief of PDLR Elchin Safarov, an employee of the PDLR Huseyn Huseynov as well as witnesses, all those who conducted the detention and search of Z.Mikayilov’s apartment. The lawyer also asked for a handwriting examination. Also the lawyer asked to invite Taleh Baghirov, arrested in Nardaran 1, as a witness. The prosecutor considered the lawyer’s petitions unreasonable and asked the court not to satisfy them. The court decided to deny satisfaction.
The lawyer made another motion to summon as a witness Rahim Gurbanov, a lawyer appointed at the expense of the state, who signed protocols and other documents in a way that was beneficial to the investigation. The lawyer also asked to appoint a handwriting examination to verify the authenticity of his signatures, to check whether Rahim Gurbanov was in Lankaran on November 29, 2015, to request the mobile operator to check the antenna data of the number in his use, as well as other motions. These motions were also rejected by the court.
On March 12, 2017 Mubariz Ibrahimov, Jabir Aliyev and Ruzi Ismayilov, arrested in Ganja, made speeches during the trial. They gave evidence that although they were presented in the case files as members of the Muslim Unity movement, in fact they were never members of this movement and did not have any connections with Taleh Baghirov. M.Ibrahimov testified that he has performed a prayer since 17 years, and on November 30, 2015 he was detained at an automobile filling station. From the testimony by M.Ibrahimov: ‘They suddenly attacked me, opened the car door from the driver’s side, and dragged me from another door and took me away. They did it as if they were taking Bin Laden away, beating and insulting me, handcuffed. M.Ibrahimov also testified that he was brought to the Ganja Main Police Department, where he was tortured: ‘One of them beat me and demanded confession. I did not even know what I should confess. Then they took me to the office of the police chief Rasim Gurbanov. He told me that I should choose between drugs and explosives. As if I was buying potatoes at the market. I saw both drugs and explosives there for the first time. I did not agree. The chief began to beat me and insult me, spat the water out of his mouth directly into my face. They told me that they would make me feel ashamed.’ From the testimony of the accused Jabir Aliyev: ‘I together with my father was detained in the workplace and brought to the Ganja Main Police Department. There, 8-9 people attacked us and beat up to 4 o’clock in the morning. I do not want to talk in detail what tortures consisted of. They pulled out one hair after another from my face, then stacked them in one heap, brought and put in front of me. I was handcuffed and put on my knees. I had broken teeth, blood poured into my face. Bu tortures, accordingly, they made me give false testimonies. I never saw Taleh Baghirov in person, and I heard the name of the organization Muslim Unity only at the time of arrest.
From the testimony of the accused Ruzi Ismayilov: ‘The charges against me are falsified. We were not only beaten, they also called us terrorists. When I was taken to the Ganja Main Police Department, they pulled off of my pants and threatened that they would commit unworthy actions against me and spread it. An attack was committed against our honour and dignity. It’s good that the people know that we are not terrorists. My father passed away, my mother was threatened in the police. I want to know why were we arrested and brought here? I am sure that Allah will punish those who did it.’ R.Ismaylov testified that drugs and explosives were planted on him by the police chief. ‘The official version says that I found an explosive in a public toilet when I went to the store to buy an iron. Do you mean that I have not an iron at my house? I was beaten so much that my legs were blue. For four months I was kept in Ganja Isolation Ward. During this time, I was not allowed to see my family and keep contact with my family by phone. On September 18, 2017, the prosecutor, having issued an accusatory speech, asked the court to convict all the accused of guilty of the brought charges and sentence: Zulfugar Mikayilov to 18 years, Faig Allahverdiyev to 15 years, Ali Huseynov to 14 years, Mehman Guliyev to 15 years, Mehman Mammadov to 14 years, Eldar Bunyatov to 14 years, Elman Aghayev to 15 years, Elkhan Hasanov to 14 years, Ramil Seyfullayev to 15 years, Mubariz Ibrahimov to 15 years, Ruzi Ismayilov and Jabir Aliyev to 16 years of imprisonment.
On October 2, 2017, the judge announced the appearance of lawyers. The lawyers of Faig Allahverdiyev, Ruzi Ismayilov and Ramil Seyfullayev were heard. The defenders stated about the falsification of the charges, and that the public prosecutor, not having irrefutable evidence, asked to condemn their clients for a long time. Lawyer of Faig Allahverdiyev said that only the police were interrogated in court, the defence did not have the opportunity to interrogate the witnesses who testified against the accused. The lawyer asked the court to pass an acquittal on his client.
Lawyer of Zulfugar Mikayilov, Ruzi Ismayilov, Mehman Mammadov and Ramil Seyfullayev Shahla Humbatova stressed in her speech that all the accused were represented by the prosecution as a criminal grouping called Muslim Unity. She said that this organization was established in 2015 in accordance with the law, as a non-governmental organization, its activity was carried out within the framework of the law. On January 11, 2015, the organization was established, and on January 13 a constituent conference was held, at which the charter was adopted and the members of the Management Board were elected. The lawyer stated that in order to understand that the organization Muslim Unity was not a criminal group, it is enough to look at its charter. The first paragraph of the statute states that ‘this organization is independent and is an organization that unites free-thinking people who want the development of Azerbaijan.’ S.Gumbatova stated that the fault of her clients was not proved in court, and she asked the court to pass an acquittal. The speech of the remaining lawyers continued on October 4, 2017, lawyers asked the court to acquit their clients. At the court session on October 30, 2017, the accused Zulfugar Mikayilov made his last statement. He said: ‘We are not supporters of feuds, we are supporters of justice (in the Azerbaijani language ‘adavat’ means feud, ‘adalat’ is justice). We are charged with an article for storing weapons, but they do not provide any evidence. In the case there are multi-storey falsifications. We were able to prove that the weapon was planted on us. The second lie was that we were members of a criminal group. In order to prove this, you can listen to our telephone conversations. For 10 months we asked the court to provide telephone prints, but this was not done. The third lie was the accusation of terrorism. In order to prove this, additional proofs are needed. Why are these accusations made just against believers? In Las Vegas, one person killed 58 people, but no one called him a terrorist. The fourth lie is a revolution. In order for this accusation to become a reality, we need 3 features: a source of financing, weapons and equipment. For a coup, political ambitions and goals are needed. In our case, nothing of this happened. Most of the accused do not even know the word ‘ambition’, they are not represented in any party. I’m not Mikhaylo from the work On the Far Shores, I’m Mikayilov. This case will go to the European Court, how will they answer then? You arrest believers, people lose faith in the court, the police, the Prosecutor’s Office. Then the judge interrupted Mikayilov’s speech and demanded to speak on the merits. Mikayilov continued his speech: ‘The spoiled relations between the state and religion are treason to the state. The judge’s weapon is justice. In Azerbaijan, an acquittal is equivalent to obtaining a Nobel Prize.’ From the testimony of the accused Mubariz Ibrahimov: ‘We did not commit any crimes, did not change the state. Since the day of my arrest, I have not seen my relatives. We have been detained for 2 years, is this not enough? We will not change our convictions, even if we are sentenced to life imprisonment. Lapshin was released, but we are still being held. Accused Jabir Aliyev: ‘We have been imprisoned for nothing for 2 years already. The most terrible tortures were applied to us. However, we could not prove our guilt. There is no terror in our beliefs. All that is written in the indictment, all is lie. I was kidnapped straight from the workplace. I was tortured. But I hope for justice.’ The remaining defendants also claimed that they had no involvement in the charges and asked the court to pass an acquittal.
On December 6, 2017, the Baku Grave Crimes Court sentenced 12 defendants under so called case “ Nardaran 3.”
Accused Zulfugar Mikayilov was found guilty of the commission of the crimes provided for in the following articles of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan: · 28,214.2.1 (Preparation for terrorism committed by an organized criminal group), · 28,214.2.3 (Preparation for the commission of terrorism with the use of firearms) · 214-2 (Public calls for terrorism) · 220.2 (Calls for active disobedience to legitimate demands of government officials and to riots, as well as calls for violence against citizens) · 228.3 (Illegal acquisition, transfer, sale, storage, transportation or carrying of weapons, component parts, ammunition, explosives and explosive devices committed by an organized criminal group) · 228.4 (Illegal acquisition, sale or carrying of gas weapons, cold steel, including cold throwing weapons) · 278 (Forcible seizure of power or forcible retention of power) · 279.1 (Creation of armed units or groups not provided for by law) · 281.2 (Public appeals directed against the state committed repeatedly or by a group of persons) · 283.2.3 (Incitement of national, racial, social or religious hatred and enmity committed by an organized group). Zulfugar Mikayilov was sentenced to 17 years of imprisonment with serving his sentence in a tight institution.
Accused FaigAllahverdiyev was found guilty of committing crimes under Articles 28,214.2.1, 28,214.2.3, 214-2, 220.2, 228.3, 228.4, 278, 279.1, 281.2, 283.2.3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan and sentenced to 13 years of imprisonment with serving his sentence in a tight institution.
Accused Ali Huseynov was found guilty of committing crimes under Articles 28,214.2.1, 28,214.2.3, 214-2, 220.2, 228.3, 228.4, 278, 279.1, 281.2, 283.2.3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan and sentenced to 12 years of imprisonment with serving his sentence in a tight institution.
Accused Mehman Guliyev was found guilty of committing crimes under Articles 28,214.2.1, 28,214.2.3, 214-2, 220.2, 228.3, 228.4, 278, 279.1, 281.2, 283.2.3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan and sentenced to 13 years in prison with the serving of punishment in a tight institution.
Accused Mehman Mammadov was found guilty of committing crimes under Articles 28,214.2.1, 28,214.2.3, 214-2, 220.2, 228.3, 228.4, 278, 279.1, 281.2, 283.2.3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan and sentenced to 12 years and 3 months of imprisonment with serving a sentence in a tight institution.
Accused Eldar Bunyatov was found guilty of committing crimes under Articles 28,214.2.1, 28,214.2.3, 214-2, 220.2, 228.3, 228.4, 278, 279.1, 281.2, 283.2.3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan and sentenced to 12 years and 3 months of imprisonment with serving a sentence in a tight institution.
Accused Elman Aghayev was found guilty of committing crimes under Articles 28,214.2.1, 28,214.2.3, 214-2, 220.2, 228.3, 228.4, 278, 279.1, 281.2, 283.2.3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan and sentenced to 13 years of imprisonment with serving a sentence in a tight institution.
Accused Elkhan Hasanov was found guilty of committing crimes under Articles 28,214.2.1, 28,214.2.3, 214-2, 220.2, 228.3, 228.4, 278, 279.1, 281.2, 283.2.3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan and sentenced to 12 years and 3 months of imprisonment with serving a sentence in a tight institution.
Accused Ramil Seyfullayev was found guilty of committing crimes under Articles 28,214.2.1, 28,214.2.3, 214-2, 220.2, 228.3, 228.4, 278, 279.1, 281.2, 283.2.3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan and sentenced to 13 years of imprisonment with serving a sentence in a tight institution.
Accused Mubariz Ibrahimov was found guilty of committing crimes under Articles 28,214.2.1, 28,214.2.3, 214-2, 220.2, 228.3, 228.4, 278, 279.1, 281.2, 283.2.3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan and sentenced to 13 years of imprisonment with serving a sentence in a tight institution.
Accused Ruzi Ismayilov was found guilty of committing crimes under Articles 28,214.2.1, 28,214.2.3, 214-2, 220.2, 228.3, 228.4, 234.4.3 (Illegal acquisition or storage for sale, manufacture, production, processing, transportation, forwarding or sale of grand drugs or psychotropic matters), 278, 279.1, 281.2, 283.2.3, 315.2 (Resistance or use of violence against a representative of the government with the use of violence dangerous to life or health) of the Criminal Code of the Azerbaijan Republic and sentenced to 15 years of imprisonment with serving a sentence in a tight institution.
Accused Jabir Aliyev was found guilty of committing crimes under Articles 28,214.2.1, 28,214.2.3, 214-2, 220.2, 228.3, 228.4, 234.4.3, 278, 279.1, 281.2, 283.2.3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan and sentenced to 14 years of imprisonment with serving a sentence in a tight institution.
Commentary by an expert lawyer:
The judicial sentence is illegal, unreasonable and inhumane. It is not clear from the sentence what evidence the court referred to, passing a conviction. Instead of justifying the sentence, the court completely rewrote the text of the indictment. The court actually substantiated the verdict with one sentence: ‘The guilt of the accused Mikayilov Zulfugar Sadraddin, Guliyev Mehman Abulfaz, Mammadov Mehman Sudef, Bunyatov Eldar Ali Aga, Aghayev Elman Seydamir, Hasanov Elkhan Heydar, Seyfullayev Ramil Suliddin, Ibrahimov Mubariz Eyyub, Ismayilov Ruzi Khalig, Aliyev Jabir Sabir was fully proved by the testimony of injured persons and witnesses, as well as other evidences confirmed in court.
The defendants were represented by the investigation as an organized criminal group. However, none of the accused was a member of the movement Muslim Unity, some of them heard the name of Taleh Baghirov first after imprisonment. Membership in the organization was possible only after a corresponding decision of the members of the Board. During the search of the office, all documents relating to the organization were confiscated, but none of them related to the accused was found. During the search of houses in which the accused lived, no membership cards were found. Witnesses who testified at the trial confirmed the fact that the accused were not members of the organization. The investigation did not provide any evidence proving their membership in the Muslim Unity.
According to Article 34.2 of Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan (RA CC), a crime is recognized as committed by a group of persons by a previous concert, if two or more persons who previously agreed on a joint commission of a crime participated in its commission jointly. Article 34.3 of RA CC states: “A crime is recognized as a committed by an organized group if it is committed by a stable group consisting of two or more persons who have previously united to commit one or more crimes.” The charge refers to “a group of persons on a previous concert” and an “organized group.” The resolution of the Plenum of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Azerbaijan dated April 20, 1999 gives an interpretation of the concept of “organized group.” The Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan provides for several types of criminal group: “group of persons”, “group of persons by previous concert” and “organized group”.
In the decision of the Plenum of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Azerbaijan it is said that the ‘group of persons by previous concert’ and the ‘organized group’ is distinguished from a simple group of persons by the presence of a sign of previous concert with the aim of committing a crime. Muslim Unity does not fit to those signs, specified in the norms of the RA CC and in the decision of the Plenum of the Constitutional Court. The movement Muslim Unity officially applied to the Ministry of Justice for registration, but they were repeatedly denied, without giving any reasons. Naturally, no criminal group will apply to the Ministry for registration. The materials of the case contain a letter from the head of the State Security Service of the RA Madat Guliyev that citizens had to fill out forms in order to become a member of the organization. The question arises: why you need to fill in the printed forms in order to become a member of a criminal group?
This weak argument of the prosecution, not proved by the materials of the case was adopted by the court. On the other hand, if the investigative body and the court agree that the Muslim Unity movement is a terrorist organization, then why only some members of the movement, and not all 600-700 people were arrested.
From the materials of the case and the testimony of the accused, it can be seen that the investigation was conducted with total, gross violations of the law. The detailed description of torture and inhuman treatment by the accused indicates that Article 9.2 of RA CC was violated according to which ‘punishments and other criminal-law measures applied to the perpetrator of the crime cannot have the nature or purpose of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.’ Article 3 of the European Convention on Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms also prohibits tortures and inhuman treatment. All articles of the European Convention have exceptions and limitations, except for Article 3. The use of torture can be justified under no circumstances.
For bad treatment to constitute a violation of Article 3, it must reach a minimum level of severity. Article 3 of the European Convention contains various concepts: inhuman, degrading treatment; inhuman, degrading punishment. With regard to tortures, they constitute an aggravated form of inhuman treatment. ‘The Court recalls that the obligation imposed on domestic authorities by virtue of the Convention to provide an effective remedy to a person who claims a violation of Article 3 does not mean that sanctions should be imposed at all costs on officials involved in the ill-treatment alleged by the person. The Convention requires only ‘an investigation capable of leading to the identification and punishment of responsible persons”. In this sense, the Court considers that the competent authorities (…) would fulfil their obligations under the Convention by commencing criminal proceedings against the police officers whom the mediator described in his/her report, whatever the outcome of this process will be’ (from the ECHR Judgment in the case Egmes v. Cyprus, para. 70). https://www.legal-tools.org/en/browse/record/d3a3c5/
During the trial, the defendants repeatedly told about the terrible tortures that were applied to them by the investigators. However, the judges did not take the initiative to investigate the tortures. The accused were tortured in the Sabunchu Police Department, Baku, in the Main Department for Combating Organized Crime of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Azerbaijan and the Ganja Main Police Department.
Confessions were obtained through tortures and inhuman treatment. All the evidence gathered and presented by the prosecution raised deep doubts about their authenticity. Article 124 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Azerbaijan (RA CCP) provides for the requirements for evidence. Thus, credible evidence (information, documents, things) received by the court or parties to criminal proceedings are recognized as evidence of criminal prosecution. These proofs: 124.1.1. Must be obtained in compliance with the requirements of the criminal procedure legislation without restriction of constitutional rights and freedoms of a person and citizen or with restriction on the order of the court (and in cases that cannot be delayed, provided by this Code – by the investigator’s decision); 124.1.2. Must show whether the crime event took place, whether there were signs of a crime in the committed act, whether the act was committed by the accused, his/her guilt or innocence, as well as other circumstances important for the correct resolution of the charge. In addition, the criminal procedure law regulates the admissibility of evidence. According to Article 125.1 of RA CCP, information, documents and other things can be accepted as evidence in the absence of doubt about their validity, source of occurrence and circumstances of receipt. Article 125.2 of RA CCP specifies in which cases the evidences are inadmissible: · Received with the deprivation or restriction of participants in the criminal process of their rights guaranteed by law, in violation of the constitutional rights and freedoms of a person and citizen or other requirements of this Code, which should or may affect the validity of these evidences; (Article 125.2.1 of RA CCP) · With the use of violence, threat, deception, tortures and other cruel, inhuman or degrading acts; (Article 125.2.2 of RA CCP).
All the accused confessed that during the investigation they gave confessions under tortures. On this issue, there is a decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) against Azerbaijan. Thus, the ECHR decision in the case of Panah Huseyn and Others v. Azerbaijan dated July 26, 2011 states: ‘The principle of fairness and competitiveness requires that the national courts pay more attention to the testimony given by witnesses in court than to the testimony given during the investigation, because their testimony given during the investigation cannot be recognized as reliable. http://echr.ketse.com/doc/35485.05-35680.05-36085.05-45553.05-en-20110726/view/
The course of the trial showed that, in addition to the above international norms, the following articles of the European Convention were also violated: Article 5(1) (Right to liberty and security of the person), Article 6(1) (Right to a fair trial), Article 6(2) (Presumption of innocence), Article 6(3) (b) (To have sufficient time to prepare his/her defence), (c) (To defend himself/herself in person or through counsel chosen by him/her), (d) (To interrogate witnesses against him/her or have the right to make these witnesses been questioned and have the right to call and examine witnesses in his/her favour under the same conditions as witnesses against him/her).
According to Article 21.2. RA CCP, the conviction of a person is inadmissible even if there are substantial suspicions of his/her guilt. In accordance with the provisions of this RA CCP, doubts that cannot be eliminated in the course of proving a charge within the framework of the relevant legal procedure are resolved in favour of the accused (suspect). Similarly, doubts that are not eliminated in the application of criminal and criminal procedural laws should be resolved in his/her favour.
Obvious doubts that arose during the trial were not resolved in favour of the accused. In addition, numerous, directly relevant motions of the defence were not satisfied by the court. Although in accordance with Article 121.2 RA CCP, the decision taken on the motion or request should be motivated and contain an assessment of the applicant’s arguments. Applications and requests aimed at comprehensive, full and objective clarification of all circumstances connected with criminal prosecution within the framework of due process of law, restoration of violated rights and legitimate interests of participants in criminal proceedings and other persons participating in criminal proceedings cannot be rejected.
Taking into account the abovementioned, it is clear that when considering this criminal case, the court violated a number of very important material and procedural norms provided for by national legislation, the fundamental norms of the European Convention and did not take into account the precedents of European Court that are binding for the member-countries of the Council of Europe