Skip to Menu Skip to Content Skip to Footer

Granata Assistant Prosecutor (Case number 16)

Attention: open in a new window. PDFPrint



The accused confessed to the assassination of the well-known bureaucrat after interrogation

 


17.11.03. Human Rights Centre in the city of Kazan received a letter from a detainee in the detention center № 3 cities Bugulma Gataullina Marcel Azatovich, born in 1973, accused of committing a crime under Art. 30, Part 2, Art. 105 of the Criminal Code. In a letter Gataullin reported that the July 1, 2003, he was detained by the Department of Interior UBOP RT on Almetjevsk. The police told him that he resembled the description of the offender, who May 22, 2003 threw a grenade F-1 in the Assistant City Prosecutor Almetjevsk P-well Gataullina taken to the police department of the city Almetyevsk.
July 2, 2003 he was detained in order station. And 92 of the 91 Code of Criminal Procedure on suspicion of having committed a crime. The same day the identification parade was held. Victims and witnesses pointed to Gataullina. July 4, 2003 Gataullin court as a preventive measure chosen detention. Win Gataullin not recognize, saying that was at the time the crime was committed elsewhere.
According Gataullina, July 10, 2003 from 16.00 to 23.00 in the building of the city police department in the office of the security officer Almetjevsk ESD I. policemen I. and S. Gataullina demanded the surrender of writing on the fact of attempted murder with the victim-tion. Gataullin refused to write turnout, and the police began to use physical violence to him to give a confession of the attempted murder: SA pulled out of the safe-mask and put it on the head Gataullina. Hands Gataullina were wearing handcuffs from behind and clasped behind his chair. S. was inserted in turn cigarettes into the hole for air in a gas mask, thus not giving Gataullin breathe air. After the sixth cigarette Gataullin lost consciousness. He woke up from the smell of ammonia and immediately got hit in the chest. J. and S. were punched him and kicked all over his body Gataullina. And continued to insist on writing the surrender. Gataullin continued to refuse, then to him again used the mask. At this time the hole was inserted cigarettes "Idel", in total 12 pieces. Then Gataullin again lost consciousness, and when he came to himself, agreed to write under the dictation appearance of guilt.
July 11, 2003 Gataullin was filed with the prosecutor of the city Almetjevsk, which reported on the application in respect of Gataullina violence by police officers.
July 11, 2003 Gataullin was charged, and he told an investigator: Z-curve, which for him was to use violence.
July 14 Gataullin re-written complaint to the prosecutor of the city Almetjevsk.
July 15, 2003 1 st Deputy City Attorney Almetjevsk B. asked Gataullina and sent it for forensic examination.
In the preliminary test were examined the following documents:
- Gataullina complaint of unlawful actions by ATC Almetjevsk,
- Treatment with the complaint of unlawful actions by ATC Almetjevsk,
- Notification of the Deputy City Attorney B. Almetyevsk from 17.07. 2003
- An order to dismiss a criminal case, issued the first deputy city prosecutor Almetyevsk BA from 17.07. 2003
- An order to dismiss the complaint, issued by deputy prosecutor FH Zagidullin from 13.08.2003,
- Notice to dismiss the complaint, signed by the Acting Head of Department for Supervision of procedural activities in the apparatus of prosecutors' offices of the RT, RT MIA and MTP GU DOJ RF RT VV Gusev,
- Notice to dismiss the complaint, signed by the head of the department to oversee the investigation of particularly important cases of prosecution RT VA Vladimirov from 22.10.2003.
The decision not to institute criminal proceedings on 17 July 2003 reported that 15 July 2003 Gataullin inspected by a forensic expert Almetyevsk Bureau of forensics to determine the presence or absence of injuries. According to the act of a forensic examination, Gataullin MA suffered bodily injury in the form of abrasions in the projection of both wrist, which was caused by the impact (impact, friction) solid object, within 3-5 days after production of the survey, which is confirmed by the characteristics of injury, did not cause short-term health problems and a small reception disability.
According to the decision not to institute criminal proceedings, interviewed during the audit IM explained that in early July 2003 following the identification of it - II and the CID police department of the city have brought Almetjevsk S. Gataullina MA in his office to talk about the circumstances of the offense, which is suspected Gataullin MA
I. speaking with Gataullin MA has lead the facts that the 22 May 2003 about 19.00 Gataullin MA, staying near the house Snoy, with intent to cause death, and throw a grenade, and then fled the scene.
In an interview, I., S. referred to the testimony of witnesses who confirmed the finding Gataullina at the crime scene at the time of its commission, which completely refutes the arguments Gataullina regarding the fact that he in any way participating in the commission of the crime did not take.
Then, in a confidential conversation with the police Gataullin MA written appearance of guilt of the crime, where he gives a consistent confessions on the circumstances of committing the crime.
According to police, and I. C., when polling Gataullina MA their part of any physical and moral influence was not.
Arguments Gataullina that his policemen were beaten, put him on the head mask, while he blocked the air and forced to breathe smoke from burning cigarettes, are not unfounded, because they are groundless and nothing has not been confirmed, indicating that Gataullin MA, qualifying employees of ESD, is trying to escape from criminal liability.
A similar explanation given S.
The decision to dismiss the criminal case also concluded that because the injuries found during the inspection, did not cause short-term health problems and minor in a disability, therefore, under the provisions of "Regulations for forensic bodily harm" is not regarded as harmful to health.
In addition, in order to dismiss a criminal case the first deputy prosecutor Almetyevsk City Attorney Senior Advisor of Justice BN refers to the fact that the area of the body in which there are injuries, are available to apply them in his own hand.
This argument and the testimony of security officers ESD J. and S., the deputy prosecutor Boris considered sufficient data indicating the absence of corpus delicti.
Decision to dismiss the criminal case was issued pursuant to paragraph 2 of part 1 of article. 24 of the Code - in the absence of corpus delicti.
The official response Gataullin prosecutors RT refers to the same arguments in order to dismiss a criminal case, issued by deputy prosecutor Almetjevsk B. In addition, prosecutors RT refers to the fact that the wine in the alleged crime is confirmed by evidence collected by criminal case.
As part of the screening was interviewed with cohabitating Gataullina Husaenovoy Gulnara Rinatovnoy born in 1981, living Almetjevsk Str., Which reported that since March 2003, she lived with Gataullin at Almetjevsk Str. July 1, 2003 about 8.00 Gataullin went outside to smoke and never returned. Some unknown man then told her that he was taken by policemen. Up to this point have Gataullina body no injuries were not available.
A preliminary check on the complaint was interviewed with counsel Gataullina Zagidullin Marat Barievichem. In an interview, he said he believes that in respect of his client actually used violence, because In a survey of members of ESD I. and S. Gataullin confessed, though before his guilt is not admitted and recanted the very next day. Gataullin himself at the first meeting with him told him that on his use of violence.
Based on the analysis of the collected material can be regarded as established:
1. Injuries Gataullin were obtained at the time of his detention.
2. The State represented by the prosecutor's office Almetjevsk and prosecutors of the Republic of Tatarstan has failed to conduct a full, impartial and thorough investigation of complaints Gataullina and has not provided convincing explanations of the circumstances obtaining Gataullin injuries.
Based on the foregoing, we may assume that the CID ATC Almetjevsk I. and S. crime was committed, under Art. 286 Part 3 of the Criminal Code Section "and" - abuse of power with violence.
Also, the actions of the ESD ATC Almetjevsk I. and S. discernible signs of torture in the sense of Art. 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as the use of police violence was aimed at obtaining a confession from the victim of a crime. [1] The arguments of prosecutors Almetjevsk and prosecutors of the Republic of Tatarstan that the evidence of guilt in the murder Gataullina and serve as proof of non-use against him of guilt, as well as the fact that the injuries had not caused the injury, as well as the fact that injuries Gataullin could cause himself, can not be justified, since it does not exclude the fact that the use of violence against Gataullina and do not prove the contrary.
Evidence of police officers and J. C. that they do not cause violence, can not be considered objective evidence, since it is on them and shows Gataullin as perpetrators of violence against him. Expect them to other readings would be expected of them confess to a crime.
You do not have sufficient data to assert that the actions of police officers in respect of Gataullina can be regarded as cruel or degrading treatment in violation of Art. 3 of the ECHR, because they are not caused Gataullin sufficiently strong physical suffering. According to the act of Forensic Medicine, Gataullin suffered bodily injury in the form of abrasions in the projection of both wrist, which did not cause short-term health problems and minor in a disability.
On the basis of the European Court of Human Rights on article 3 of the ECHR, if a person gets injured while in custody, as a result of the authorities of physical force, the burden of proof clearly rests with the authorities conducting the detention of a person, and that they should explain the occurrence of injuries (Decision of the European Court of Human Rights on 28 July 1999 Selmuni v. France). Girlfriend Gataullina Husaenova GR claims that before his arrest 01 июля 2003, the body Gataullina no injuries were. Act as a forensic examination carried out by 15 July 2003, concludes that the injuries Gataullin caused by the impact (impact, friction) solid object, within 3-5 days after production of the survey, that is, in fact when he was in the ATC Almetjevsk.
According to the European Court, "if allegations of ill-treatment by police or other public authority, Article 3 shall be interpreted together with the general rule under Art. 1 of the Convention: "to ensure that any person within its jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in the Convention. This interpretation means the State's obligation to conduct an effective official investigation. The investigation is effective if it leads to the identification and establishment of the guilty, otherwise - the general legal prohibition of torture and degrading treatment and punishment will be ineffective in practice [2]
Conclusion on the effectiveness of testing carried out too early to speak, because not exhausted all means of national defense. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the city prosecutor Almetjevsk is directly related to:
1) identity of the victims of the crime charged against Gataullin, since C-on is the deputy prosecutor of Almetevk;
2) investigate crimes alleged Gataullin, because it is the prosecutor's office Almetjevsk performs a preliminary investigation of this case,
3) complaints Gataullina to use violence against him by the police Internal Affairs Almetjevsk, because it is the responsibility of the prosecutor's office Almetjevsk is the duty of the audit of the complaint and the decision to initiate or refusal to initiate criminal proceedings.
There is a conflict of interest and the obvious obstacles to the objective investigation of the complaint at the prosecutor's office Almetjevsk.

Specialist investigations
Human Rights Centre of Kazan
According to the prosecutor RT Kafilya Amirov, Svetlana Subbotina recognized as the best deputy prosecutor in the Republic of Tatarstan in 2003.
From an interview with The Republic of Tatarstan "№ 4-5 on Jan. 9, 2004:
"Among the best present to mention only the winners of the annual republican professional competition ... better deputy prosecutor began Svetlana Subbotina from Almetyevsk and Pavel Nikolaev from Novo-Savinovskogo district of Kazan".

[1] For example, in "Aksoy v. Turkey" 26.11.1996, paragraph 64, the court found that the treatment meted claimant "can only be done intentionally. Such treatment is likely to have been taken in order to obtain a confession or information from the applicant. "
[2] See eg., ECHR decision on the case Labita against Italy on 06.04.2000 Mr. pairs. 131.


These are the facts gathered in the course of its Human Rights Center of Kazan public investigation. All statements and explanations given to citizens voluntarily. Not all of these facts can be confirmed by state authorities. Employees of the Human Rights Centre of Kazan confident that the facts indicate misconduct of agents of the state. Human Rights Centre reserves the right to seek an effective official investigation on them, including international institutions.

We will provide more detailed information, facts and evidence in each case. To do this, write us a letter.

Reports - Правоохранители