In the beginning of December lawyer Sapiyat Magomedova, who was beaten violently by the officers of Khasavyurt police department on June, 17, 2010, was notified that the term of preliminary investigation into the case initiated against her (in accordance with Article 319 of the CC of the RF, “contempt of an authority representative”) had been extended for one more month, namely, until January, 2, 2011. At the same time, the investigation of the criminal case initiated against the officers of the special firing group of the patrol and post service (SOG PPSM) of OVD of the town of Khasavyurt who had beaten her (the case was initiated in accordance with Article 286, part 3(a) of the CC of the RF, “abuse of office”) has not yet started.

On November, 29, 2010 Sapiyat Magomedova filed a complaint against the investigation bodies’ omission to act in accordance with Article 125 (legal regulations for proceeding of complaints) of the CPC of the RF. In her complaint, Magomedova mentions the following arguments in order to prove the inefficiency of the investigation:

1. The criminal case that was to be initiated on June, 17, 2010 was initiated with undue delay of 13 days.

2. For almost 5 months (July, 1 to November, 29, 2010) investigator H. Arslangeraev failed to identify the individuals who had committed the crime against the lawyer. However, he ordered judicial examinations with regard to specific people, namely, SOG PPSM OVD of Khasavyurt officers (B. Magdiev, A. Yusupov, M. Alibulatov, S. Magomedov, N. Mollaev, B. Abdukhadgiev. Therefore it can be inferred that the investigation identified the circle of suspects.

3. Despite the multiple requests made by the victim and her lawyer, the investigator H. Arslangeraev did not implement a number of procedural actions, such as identification of the suspects, face-to-face questioning of the above-mentioned people.

4. Notwithstanding the numerous victim’s requests to let her watch the records from the CCTV installed at OVD, and her application to additional inspect the site of the event (OVD of Khasavyurt) in her presence, investigator H. Arslangeraev rejected flatly.

5. Investigator H. Arslangeraev is scrupulously doing everything to extend the term of investigation. The numerous victim’s applications to provide her with the copies of the decision to extend the term of investigation so as to file an appeal (in compliance with Articles 124 and 125 (the procedures for consideration of a complaint by a public prosecutor, the head of an investigative body, the judicial procedure for consideration of complaints) of the CPC of the RF) have met his flat oral rejection. He has been saying that he is obliged to simply notify the victim about the extension of the term of investigation. By doing so, he has been depriving Magomedova of her right to fully protect her rights and interests and to provide additional evidence for the case. However, in accordance with Article 11, part 1 (protection of rights and freedoms of a human and a citizen in the course of criminal proceedings) of the CPC of the RF, the investigator must facilitate a victim in implementation of his or her procedural and constitutional rights.

6. Until present, no one has been charged nor has anyone been dismissed from their posts. It enables the people responsible for the crime to prevent establishing the truth with regard to the essence of the case, to conceal the evidence and pressurize the witnesses.

In her complaint, lawyer Magomedova also mentioned that she had directly asked Arslangeraev, on numerous occasions, why the investigation had been being delayed. The investigator would tell that the questioning of the witnesses is needed, but would do nothing to actually do that.

According to Magomedova and her lawyers, Arslangeraev has been deliberately, using unsubstantiated reasoning, delaying the investigation of the criminal case against the SOG officers so that the investigation of the other criminal case against Magomedova herself in accordance with article 319 (contempt of an authority representative) of the CC of the RF, in which militia officer B. Magdiev acts as a victim, would be finished and forwarded to the court before the decision on the case against the militia officers is delivered. Therefore investigator H. Arslangeraev’s goal is, in the victim’s opinion, to ensure that Magomedova, and not those who have indeed committed the crime, would be found guilty.

The victim and her lawyers believe that the coordinated actions of the administrative bodies of the Investigative committee in the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the RF on Dagestan pursue the very same goal. They have artificially divided one event into two criminal cases so as to cover up the militia officers’ guilt and charge Magomedova with an ostensible offence.

It is obvious that the two cases have been being investigated with unequal diligence. While the investigation of the case against the SOG officers has been being put off, the investigation of the case against Magomedova, on the contrary, is accelerating. The consideration of Sapiyat Magomedova’s complaint about the investigation bodies’ omission to act is scheduled for December, 20, 2010. Judge of Sovetskiy district of Makhachkala, K.A. Abdulgapurov has disqualified himself already, and a new judge will be appointed.

Sapiyat Magomedova believes that the case initiated against her is both illegal and groundless and is therefore subject to repeal. The lawyer’s complaint reads, “Notwithstanding the apparent absence of elements of offense in my actions, after the criminal case against the militia officers was initiated based on my complaint … which has already become common practice in SU SKP the RF on Dagestan … a criminal case against me was initiated with no relevant reasoning, for the sake of bargaining”. Magomedova also appealed against the initiation of the case, following the regulations of Article 125 of the CPC of the RF.

Magomedova puts forward the following arguments in her complaint:

1. The application submitted by commander of SOG PPSM OVD of Khasavyurt, B. Magdiev, served as the grounds for the initiation of the criminal case. It can be inferred from the application that on June, 17, 2010, at about 4.10 p.m., near a check post point (CPP) of OVD of Khasavyurt (Daibova str., 4) Magomedova publicly insulted Magdiev while the latter was in the pursuance of his duties. His subordinates were present as well as other people. Specifically, Magomedova used such words as “scums”, “bruts”, “sluts”, “bitches” as well as other obscene words in his regard, which humiliates both him and his subordinates as the representatives of the authorities. At the same time, the conclusion about the sufficiency of the information indicating the substantial elements of offence had been made on the grounds of questioning of the two witnesses that are interested in the outcome of the case, namely, militia officers S.A. Adilov and A.A. Amirkhanov.

2. A substantial element of a crime, as stipulated by Article 319 of the CC of the RF, is an event of public insult of an authority representative while the latter is discharging his or her duties or in connection with such discharge.

However, on July, 1, 2010 a criminal case against the officers of SOG PPSM OVD of Khasavyurt was initiated in accordance with Article 286, points (a), (b), part 3, of the CC of the RF. It can be inferred from the resolution on the criminal case initiation that on June, 17, 2010, at about 4.10 p.m., Magomedova allegedly, without permission from CPP officer in duty (M.Y. Goygishev), trespassed on OVD land. After that, she was led out of the territory of the militia department by the officers of SOG PPSM OVD. While doing so, the latter were using violence and caused bodily injuries of light severity level, i.e., their actions apparently misused their authority, which resulted in substantial violation of the victim’s rights and legal interests.

Magomedova believes that despite the fact that the circumstances preceding the crime against her are not described in an accurate manner, the fact of using violence against her, i.e., abuse of power by the SOG officers, is obvious. And it was B. Magdiev who had initiated the crime and acted as the main executor.

Magomedova came to OVD of Khasavyurt so as to perform her official duties, which is to protect her customer, suspect M. Evtemirova, and not to insult the militia officers (this can be also inferred from the text of the decree on the criminal case initiation against Magomedova and the officers of SOG PPSM). Taking this into account, it can be concluded that she could only say the offensive words after or in the process of B. Magdiev and his subordinates abusing his authority and causing her bodily injuries. However, Magomedova states that she actually had not pronounced the above-mentioned words with regard to B. Magdiev. Consequently, it is unacceptable to admit that while the officers of SOG PPSM were misusing their powers they were discharging their duties at the same time, and that the oral insults that followed (which, according to the investigation, Magomedova addressed B. Magdiev) were related to them discharging their duties. The beating of a lawyer who came to OVD so as to perform her duties can hardly be regarded as the officers’ duties.

The lawyer notes that in accordance with Article 146 (initiation of a criminal case by public prosecution) of the CPC of the RF, the criminal case can only be initiated if both the grounds and the reason are in presence. While looking into the materials of the case it has been found out that the decree on the criminal case initiation the application submitted by Magdiev on June, 21, 2010 was specified as the reason. However, the application of June, 21, 2010 was absent from the materials. Magomedova submitted additional complaint and specified that there was no reason for the initiation of the case since there was no relevant application. Her lawyer submitted appeal for reclamation of the crime registry book (KUSP) from the investigation committee.

The judge has been postponing the proceeding twice. In the end, on November, 10, the hearing took place, and the KUSP was provided to the court, from which it is obvious that the application by Magdiev on the crime committed in his regard dated of June, 21, 2010 was added to one of the rapports. But the coupon ticket was not given to Magdiev. Magdiev’s application of June, 21, 2010 appeared in the case materials by the date of this court hearing. Magomedova’s lawyers requested judicial and forensic, physical and chemical and technical examination of the application outside Dagestan so as to identify the date of its composition. Instead of that, the judge ordered handwriting examination, which had not been ordered by either party. Magomedova was not provided with the record of proceedings of the court hearing of November, 10, 2010, which had been requested multiple times. Her cassation appeal against the order of the handwriting expertise was ignored. The case has been forwarded for implementation of the handwriting examination. The consideration of the appeal has been postponed again.

We would like to remind you that in sympathy with Sapiyat Magomedova the chamber of lawyers of the Republic of Dagestan has assigned 10 lawyers for her. Besides, the lawyers of Kizilyurt went on strike, which was terminated on November, 10, after the administration of the district and the security agencies undertook to guarantee safety to lawyers. The lawyers of Khasavyurt went on strike as well.

December 13, 2010

For further information:

Human Rights Center Memorial, 127051, Russia, Moscow, Maly Karetny, 12

tel: +7 (495) 225-3118, fax: +7 (495) 624-2025, email: memhrc@memo.ru