The Status of Investigations into Crimes Against Civilians Committed by Representatives of Federal Forces on the Territory of the Chechen Republic during the Course of Military Action 1999-2000 (as of May 2001)
Prague Watchdog's note: The following document was published on the website of Human Rights Centre Memorial on July 10, 2001.
In March of this year, at a meeting with a joint delegation from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the Russian State Duma, the General Prosecutor of Russia, Vladimir Ustinov, assured European parliamentarians that
“not a single infringement of the law, not one human rights violation will go unexamined by the office of the Russian prosecutor.”
He emphasized that for representatives of the Prosecutor’s Office “there is no difference whose rights are being violated – those of peaceful civilians or military servicemen.”
Various official figures from the Russian Federation constantly repeat that everyone who has committed crimes against peaceful civilians will be punished, regardless of their rank and title.
To what extent does this correspond with reality?
The human rights center “Memorial” attempts to follow continuously the real situation with investigations into crimes against peaceful inhabitants, prisoners, staff of medical facilities and others, committed by both sides in the course of the armed conflict in the Chechen Republic.
It is patently obvious that the prosecutor is demonstrating an absolutely differentiated approach to the investigation of crimes committed by representatives of federal forces and fighters. If prosecutors efficiently institute criminal proceedings and effectively follow through with them in cases involving fighters, the reaction is absolutely different to complaints about crimes on the part of soldiers and policemen. It took over a year to arrest, identify and hand over to the courts members of the abolished division of OMON servicemen from Perm. In that same amount of time, prosecutors could not bring anyone to answer for the many murders of peaceful civilians in Novy Aldy, the Staropromyslovski district of Groznyi, and Alkhan-Yurt.
Over the course of months there was no answer of any kind from the prosecutor’s office in response to declarations from citizens about the disappearance of their relatives who were detained by soldiers or OMON servicemen. The prosecutor’s office itself violated the law in the most flagrant manner, as the Criminal Proceedings code sets forth a well-defined timeline for conducting initial verifications and making decisions about declared crimes: three days after a declaration is received, and in exceptional cases, no more than ten days.
Only after a long correspondence with the prosecutor’s office, and by attracting the attention of Duma deputies, “Memorial” succeeded in getting criminal proceedings instituted in some cases. All the same the number of criminal cases remained absolutely insignificant in comparison with the number of crimes committed.
In recent months, however, the situation has begun to change somewhat. The prosecutor’s office has begun to initiate criminal cases in response to declarations by citizens. It’s not certain, however, that the crimes will be investigated and that those guilty will be punished. It’s perfectly clear that the noticeable increase in criminal proceedings is connected with pressure from international organizations: the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and the UN. There needs to be some kind of answer to the puzzled questions from the world community; the legal defense system has to produce some kind of work. All the same, the Prosecutor continues to use opportunities to suspend investigation into criminal cases, and then to close them altogether.
From documents presented by the Russian side to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, from the Prosecutor’s answers to inquiries, and from other sources of information, “Memorial” knows that until May 2001 the military Prosecutor’s Office investigated 72 criminal cases about crimes committed by military servicemen in relation to residents of the Chechen Republic during the period of the “counter terrorist operation.” Of these, eight cases involving 11 military servicemen were examined in military courts. Not one of the accused was acquited.
In relation to this, the Special Representative of the President of the Russian Federation, V. A. Kalamanov, declared on May 24 at a meeting with the General Secretary of the Council of Europe, Walter Schwimmer, that “eleven military servicemen have already been sentenced to various prison terms.”
However in reality the situation is somewhat different.
1. In relation to two military servicemen, the court dropped criminal cases by amnesty (the murder of civilian Sh. Mirzaev in Staroshedrinskaya, committed with excessive force, and the causation of serious bodily harm to civilian A. Khizirova in the village of Bachi-Yurt). Nine military servicemen were sentenced to various punishments, but in four instances the punishments turned out to be purely symbolic.
2. One sailor was sentenced to punishment in the form of “restriction of military service to a period of one year, with withholding to the state of 10 percent of monetary compensation” for causing injuries of moderate severity to citizen A. Elpieva as a result of careless handling of a weapon.
3. A senior lieutenant was sentenced to two years of conditional imprisonment for shooting while drunk and for damage to the property of local residents in the village of Bachi-Yurt on 17 January 2000.
4. A senior lieutenant was sentenced to three years of conditional imprisonment for a drunken attack on Z. Kumgaeva and A. Dakhaeva (who died) in Shali on 9 June 2000.
5. A private was sentenced to five years of imprisonment with deferred fulfillment of the sentence for four years for an attack on a automobile, leading to the death of citizens A. Tatashev and M. Tataev.
Five military servicemen were genuinely “sentenced to various periods of imprisonment.”
1. On 5 February 2000 a group of drunken soldiers in the village of Khankala killed a woman, caused another serious physical harm, stole property, and then set fire to a home. For these crimes a lieutenant and a hired soldier were sentenced to prison (in a high security prison colony) for 12 and 9 years respectively.
2. On 2 November 2000 in Grozny three military servicemen (draftees) committed a robbery against salespeople at a kiosk and stole property. For this crime they were sentenced to prison (in a high security prison colony) for periods of 4 years, 4,5 years, and 2,5 years respectively.
In an additional 15 cases, investigations have been completed and the cases have been sent to military courts. Among these is the case of Colonel Budanov. In total, 5 murder cases, 2 robbery cases, 2 cases of theft, 2 cases involving hooliganism (for some reason, a case involving the explosion of a grenade, leading to serious physical consequences for the survivor, has been included in this category), 1 case of larceny, 2 cases of highway/transport accidents (in both cases with fatal results) and 1 case of intentionally causing bodily harm have been sent to the courts.
Eleven criminal cases have been suspended in connection to the failure “to verify the identity of the individual accused of committing a crime.” Among suspended cases are some involving pre-meditated murder, the deaths of people by shooting, disappearances of detainees, and robberies.
Eight more criminal cases have been dropped. Among these are three cases which were ended by an act of amnesty (hooliganism and theft), three cases dropped for the absence of corpus delicti (two cases of civilian deaths from shooting and one case of removing property for use in heating barracks), and two cases ended in connection with the death of the person committed the crime.
Twenty one cases are still being investigated.
Nine criminal cases have been forwarded for investigation to the offices of the prosecutor of the Chechen Republic. This means that the military prosecutor “determined the non-participation of military servicemen in committing the crimes.”
To take an example, there is the case of the disappearance of three young men – I. Dombaev, M. Lyanov and T. Tabadzhanov – in Grozny on 28 July 2000. It is known to us, that the Prosecutor’s office in Grozny clearly established that members of the Pskov OMON detained them, delivered the detainees to the base of the 8th brigade of special internal troops, and handed them over to a specific officer, whose name and position were also clearly established. After this point the young men disappeared. But the military servicemen refused to appear for questioning at the Office of the Prosector of the Chechen Republic. Then, in correspondence with legislation, the case was handed over to the military prosecutor, who is the only one who may conduct criminal cases involving military servicemen. The case lay there for some time and then was sent back. According to the military prosecutor, the three youths were detained in Grozny by “unidentified individuals in camouflage uniforms,” but the participation of military servicemen in the crime could not be established. Absurdity? No – sabotage! This case now senselessly lies in the Grozny prosecutor’s office – the civilian prosecutor cannot question anyone and cannot undertake any other investigatory actions. The natural outlook for this and many similar cases is suspension and then closure.
In the majority of cases when military perpetrators are not apprehended at the scene of the crime, or there is not other irrefutable evidence that the crime was committed by military servicemen of a specific division, the criminal case is initiated and conducted by the territorial civilian prosecutor.
In fact, representatives of federal forces more often than not operate without any distinguishing features (marks), and often with technical equipment whose license plates or tags have been painted over. The logic of the military prosecutor is simple in such an instance: “Maybe the crime was committed by OMON forces, but maybe it was disguised fighters, or maybe Martians? Prove to us that military people did it, then we’ll take it up for investigation!” But how can the staff of the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic prove this if the military won’t allow them into the military bases and refuse to answer their questions?!
In total the prosecutor’s office of the Chechen Republic has initiated 302 criminal proceedings in instances where there is a basis to believe that crimes against peaceful civilians were committed by participants of federal forces.
And only one case from among all of these was completed and sent to court! The court sentenced a member of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD) from Kaliningrad region to conditional imprisonment for the murder of a citizen at the central market in Gudermes.
213 (!!!) cases have been dropped in connection with “the inability to verify the identify of the person accused of committing the crime.” The most common among these cases are instances of “detainment by unidentified individuals in camouflage” with the subsequent disappearance of the detainee. Also here are murders, robberies and thefts committed by “unidentified individuals in camouflage.” Here too are shootings leading to people’s deaths.
21 cases continue to be investigated.
67 cases have been sent to the military prosecutor’s office, but for some reason have not yet been accepted as falling under its jurisdiction.
This is a picture which does not inspire optimism!
Source: Memorial |
|
