Апрельская резолюция Европарламента по Казахстану не осталась без внимания Акорды. На днях участники совещательной группы по сотрудничеству со странами Центральной Азии получили объемное и подробное «оправдание» от посольства Казахстана в Бельгии. «Мы даже сотрудников ФБР приглашали — для объективности», – пишут казахстанские дипломаты. Правда, ФБРовцы почему-то не приехали.
Принятая в 20-х числах апреля резолюция Европейского парламента по Казахстану стала самой жесткой из всех выходивших ранее. Особого внимания удостоились Владимира Козлов и Вадим Курамшин, имена которых звучали практически в каждом выступлении депутатов в ходе обсуждения проекта резолюции на предварительном заседании до голосования.
Так, депутат от либералов Леонидас Донскис напомнил коллегам, что Владимир Козлов был арестован сразу после того, как посетил Европарламент.
«Может показаться, что содержание резолюции слишком жестоко по отношению к Казахстану, — выразила свое мнение Вероник де Кейзер, представительница Альянса социалистов из Бельгии, — но я считаю, что это не так. Я уверена, что мы задаем правильные вопросы». «Правда, пока не понятно, какие ответы мы на них получим», — такими словами закончила она свое выступление.
Теперь уже ясно, какой ответ. В лучших традициях бюрократии казахстанские дипломаты расписали весь жанаозенский процесс — от «беспорядков» до приговора «организаторам» и «подстрекателям». По мнению авторов документа, «весь процесс шел при полном уважении к верховенству закона и принципам прав человека, а Казахстан предпринял беспрецедентные меры».
«В частности, впервые в истории уголовного процесса в расследовании этого уголовного дела участвовала общественная комиссия, состоящая из представителей политических партий, неправительственных организаций, СМИ, а также ветеранов-нефтяников, врачей, экономистов и юристов».
Наверное, перечисленные на бумаге, эти меры действительно выглядят «беспрецедентными» для Казахстана. Однако, как всем известно, они не отражают того, что действительно предпринималось властями. И думаем, европейские депутаты благодаря информированию со стороны независимых НПО и общественных деятелей неплохо об этом осведомлены.
С нами согласен и активист Айнур Курманов:
– Этот документ был распространен посольством РК в Бельгии среди депутатов Европейского парламента как ответ на апрельскую резолюцию, осуждающую Акорду за репрессии в отношении нефтяников Жанаозена, правозащитников, свободной прессы и лидеров оппозиции, — объяснил он.
По мнению Курманова, таким образом МИД Казахстана по заданию администрации президента пытается дезавуировать все обвинения в свой адрес и оправдать кровавые преступления в Мангистауской области во время подавления забастовки нефтяников, закрытие «Голоса республики», «Стан ТВ», «К-плюс», признанных «экстремистскими», арест и осуждение Владимира Козлова и закрытие партии «Алга», осуждение нефтяников и Розы Тулетаевой, а также известного правозащитника Вадима Курамшина.
Что интересно, казахстанский МИД признал, что повторный арест Вадима был связан именно с поездкой его в Варшаву на сессию ОБСЕ по человеческому измерению осенью прошлого года.
– Якобы он нарушил подписку о невыезде из Казахстана, хотя посол РК при ОБСЕ гарантировал ему при многочисленных свидетелях неприкосновенность в случае, если он вернется на родину. Как видим, назарбаевские дипломаты не выполняют своих обещаний, — сделал вывод Айнур Курманов.
Зато умеют оправдывать промахи властей, добавим от себя…
…НИЖЕ публикуем оригинал документа, о котором идет речь в материале.
DOCUMENT PROVIDED BY THE EMBASSY OF
Regarding the riots in Zhanaozen
As you know, the tragic events took place at the
A specialized interagency investigative team guided by the special prosecutor was established by the Presidential decree of the
The investigation team held more than 200 examinations, questioned nearly 1,200 witnesses, conducted door-to-door round homes in the central city area.
Taking into account all the originality of the emerged situation and the wider social and political resonance around it,
To this end, while ensuring absolute respect to the rule of law and human rights’ principles,
In particular, for the first time in the history of criminal procedure the investigation of that criminal case involved the public commission composed of representatives of political parties, non-governmental organizations, media as well as veteran oil workers, doctors, economists and lawyers.
Representatives of the public committee together with representatives of the media attended the temporary detention camps, where they met with representatives of the prosecuting authorities (after interventions of the Commission, restraint measures for 11 accused were changed from arrest to more lenient measures and later they were released from criminal liability).
In addition, at the end of 2011 Mangistau region was visited by representatives of the international NGO ‘Penal Reform International’ and a group of Kazakhstani bloggers who also interacted with the local people, visited the building of the Interior and the detention center.
It should also be noted that in order to maximize compliance with the principles of transparency enshrined in the OSCE and the UN charters, Kazakhstan has invited experts of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (the US) to take part in the investigation of criminal cases, but they did not come.
All procedural actions (searches, arrests, interrogations, detentions, etc.) against the accused by the investigating authorities and the courts are made in strict accordance with the national legislation.
The same principle applied to the lawsuits against the organizers and active participants of the riots in Mangistau region.
Thus, the trial was held in the most open regime, providing convenient conditions for participation in the process of international and domestic observers, representatives of the media, relatives of the accused and victims.
Among the observers who participated in the trial were Counselor of the British Embassy in Kazakhstan Mr. Thomas James Blake, officers of the U.S. Embassy in Kazakhstan Mr. Eric Liederbach and Mrs. Alia Zhantikina, representatives of the European Union to the Republic of Kazakhstan Mrs. Anete Yakobsone and Mrs. Karlygash Djamankulova, representatives of the number of non-governmental organizations.
Most observers from international organizations and government institutions that participated in the preliminary and judicial investigations have confirmed provision of transparency by
In June 4, 2012 Aktau city court passed the sentence against 37 participants of the riots that took place in the city of
– 13 persons to imprisonment;
– 16 persons — on probation;
– 5 persons exempt from punishment for an act of amnesty;
– 3 persons acquitted for lack of evidence of their guilt.
Out of 37 people prosecuted (two women and two minors), 8 were accused of organizing and calling for riots and the rest — for involvement in the riots, in threat and use of violence against the authorities and desecration of the national flag and looting.
Checks have been conducted on the facts stated by 16 defendants on use against them of unlawful methods of investigation and inquiry, which were resulted in the procedural decisions on rejection to institute criminal proceedings. These procedural decisions have not been appealed by the applicants.
It should be noted that the Prosecutor General’s Office opened a criminal case against the police officers who unjustifiably use their firearms.
In 27th January 2012 the team of investigators charged Deputy Chief of the Mangistau region Interior Department Mr. Utegalieva K. for the abuse of power or official authority, who gave orders to use of service weapons in the air or on the feet in case of danger from the rioters that led to the death and wounds of people.
The similar article of the Criminal Law was applied to the Head of the department for combating extremism of Mangistau region Mr. B.Bagbayev, the Deputy chief of Zhanaozen Police Mr. E.Bakytkaliuly, Security officer Interior Dept. of Mangistau region Mr. R.Zholdybayev, the city police department investigator of Zhanaozen Mr. Esbergenov.
All these police officers were sentenced to actual imprisonment terms.
In addition to this, the criminal charges have been brought against the officials of local executive bodies and managers of oil companies, whose illegal actions contributed to social unrest and prolonged strike of oilers that eventually grew into riots, as well as the Head of the temporary detention center, who allowed an unlawful detention of Mr. B. Kenjebayev.
Regarding V.Kozlov’s case
The National Security Committee of the
The reason for initiating of criminal proceedings against the said persons was not only the facts of distribution of campaign literature, printing materials that contained elements of inciting social discord and calls for violent upheaval and change of the constitutional order, but the other criminal actions.
For instance, the accused persons spread among the dismissed oil workers pre-fabricated leaflets under the following slogans: ‘The fighters of the sacred
Preliminary investigation and prosecution of the criminal case showed that one of the reasons of Zhanaozen riots were proactive actions of the leader of ‘Alga’ unregistered party Kozlov and the others on inducement of dismissed oilers to continue protests and harsh opposition to the authorities.
The experts have established the signs of inciting social discord, calls for the unconstitutional overthrow of the government from the texts of circulated leaflets under the order of Kozlov among the dismissed workers, conversations and statements of the defendants.
The findings of Kazakhstani experts have been verified by Mr. Mikhail Grachev, Member of the Guild of language experts, Doctor of Philological Sciences and Professor of the
At the same time, an involved by the defense party a Russian Federation expert Mr. Dmitry Starostin also noted that statements of V.Kozlov and the others were able to influence the change of consciousness, opinions, judgments, human behavior and a group of people as well as that they had materials containing threats to use violence for resolving conflicts in social relations.
Aktau court began hearing of the criminal case against V.Kozlov, A.Aminov and S.Sapargali on 16th August 2012. V.Kozlov and A.Aminov were also put on trial for creation and management of an organized criminal group.
A.Aminov and S.Sapargali pleaded themselves guilty both at the initial stage of the process and in the course of the hearing of arguments in the court.
In the course of 27 hearings in the courtroom, 43 witnesses have been questioned including 22 of prosecuting party and 21 of the defense team as well as 8 experts.
Among those questioned were representatives of central and local governmental bodies (Vice-Minister of Labor and Social Protection Mr.Nurymbetov, former Deputy Mayor of Mangistau region Mr.Aitkulov), senior officials of oil companies (ex-director and deputy managers of ‘OzenMunaiGaz’ Production Branch Mr.Eshmanov, Mr.Khituov and Mr.Orynbayev), oil strikers (Mrs.Sokolova, Mrs.Azhigalieva, Mr.Isenbaev, Mr.Karashev, Mr.Saktaganov, Mrs.Ungarbaeva, Mr.Lukmanov etc.), as well as the members of ‘Alga’ NGO (Head of Almaty branch Mr.Amirov) and the others.
The testimony of witnesses of the prosecuting party and the experts were well reasoned and logically built, its content was clearly established the guilt of V.Kozlov, S.Sapargali and A.Aminov.
It should be noted that the public prosecutor has taken into account the findings of psychological and philological expertise and partially dropped a charge against S.Sapargali (under Article 164 Part 3 of the Criminal Code).
While speaking in hearing of arguments on 28 September
In so doing, A.Aminov fully pleaded himself guilty, repented and apologized for his actions that resulted in serious consequences in city of
S.Sapargali expressed his gratitude to the public prosecutor for dropping of a charge under Part 3 of Article 164 and confessed to a crime under Part 2 of Article 170 of the Criminal Code.
V.Kozlov, as he did earlier at the beginning of the proceedings, pleaded him not guilty.
All procedural actions (searches, arrests, interrogations, detentions, etc.) against the accused by the investigating authorities and the courts are made in strict accordance with the national legislation.
The trial was open and accessible to all newcomers.
On 8th October 2012 Aktau City Court found V.Kozlov guilty of committing criminal acts envisaged under part 1 of Article 235, paragraph 3 of Article 164, paragraph 2 of Article 170 of the Criminal Code of the
On 8th October 2012 Aktau City Court found A.Aminov guilty of committing criminal acts envisaged under part 1 of Article 235, part 3 of Article 164, part 2 of Article 170 of the Criminal Code of the
On 8th October 2012 Aktau City Court found S.Sapargali guilty of committing criminal acts envisaged under part 2 of Article 170 of the Criminal Code of the
The bringing the said individual to criminal liability does not relate to their professional activities.
On 10th October 2012 Mangistau Regional Court has received an appeal from Mr. A. Plugov, the lawyer of V.Kozlov on the verdict of Aktau City Court as of 08.10.2012.
V.Kozlov has appealed to the above verdict on 23rd October 2012 as well.
By the resolution of the court of appeal as of 19 October 2012, the court’s decision upheld and the complaint was dismissed.
The verdict of Aktau city court and a resolution of the court of appeal have been considered and upheld by the resolution of the Mangistau regional court as of 13 March 2013 and the complaints of the convict V. Kozlov and his lawyers have been dismissed.
Regarding the claims for recognition of the ‘Alga’ and ‘Halyk Maidany’ as extremist organizations
According to the verdict regarding V.Kozlov, S.Sapargali and A.Aminov, the activity of ‘Alga’ and ‘Halyk Maidany’ unregistered public associations has been declared as bearing of extremist nature.
The findings of the court on that the activity of ‘Alga’, ‘Halyk Maidany’ and mentioned media has the sings of extremism have been confirmed by a number of comprehensive forensic and legal expertises.
In accordance with the provisions of subpara 5 of Article 1 of the Law ‘On countering extremism, the commitment by a person or an entity of acts pursuing to forcible change of the constitutional system, violating of the sovereignty of the Republic of Kazakhstan as well as integrity, inviolability and inalienability of its territory, undermining national security and defense, forcible seizure or forcible retention of power, incitement of social and class hatred regard as an extremism.
The recognition of an extremist organization is to be done in the court according to paragraph 1 of Article 8 of the Law of the
An organization is recognized as an extremist if at least one of its divisions (branches and representative offices) exercises extremism with the knowledge of one of the governing bodies of the organization.
Based on the abovementioned, the Almaty city Prosecutor’s office have commenced suits and claims on 20 November 2012 for recognizing of ‘Alga’ and ‘Halyk Maidany’ as extremist organizations.
According to the effective verdict regarding V.Kozlov, S.Sapargali and A.Aminov, the activity of a number of media have been declared as bearing of an extremist nature.
In particular, the court’s verdict stated that ‘conceptual content’ of the ‘K+’ channel, ‘Stan-TV’, ‘Respublika’ internet portals, ‘Respublika’, ‘Golos Respubliki’, ‘Vzglyad’ newspapers are aimed at inciting of social discord.
The analysis of the ‘K+’ channel programmes, publications in ‘Golos Respubliki’, ‘Vzglyad’ newspapers, ‘Stan-TV’, ‘Respublika’ internet portals and the other materials showed advocacy of forcible takeover of power and undermining the security of a state.
These findings of the court have been confirmed by conclusions of a number of the forensic and legal examinations.
The initial examination was conducted comprehensively by the Kazakhstani experts.
Moreover, these materials have been evaluated both by linguists and psychologists, political scientists and a number of the other experts from different fields of excellence.
More or less they all pointed out that there are extreme expressions in these materials.
Furthermore, when the protection of V.Kozlov invited a Russian expert-philologist, who has, while maintaining on the whole a line of defense in the court, also confirmed that these materials were calling for the violent overthrow of the government in
Considering the above, the Public Prosecutor of Almaty city went to the court with the following claims and statements on the 20th November 2012:
– on recognition of 8 newspapers and 23 internet resources (clone newspapers and mirror sites) as a unified mass media ‘Respublika’ and discontinue its production and distribution in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
– on discontinuation of production and distribution of ‘Vzglyad’ newspaper and its duplicating online resources in the territory of the
– on discontinuation of distribution of ‘K+’ TV channel and its duplicating online resources in the territory of the
– on discontinuation of distribution of ‘stan.tv’ internet video portal in the territory of the
All lawsuits and statements of the prosecutor were satisfied in full.
Currently, the court’s pleas in respect of the above media have come into force.
Meanwhile, the professional activities of journalists are not withheld or discontinued, that is, the journalists of the said media are free to engage in journalistic activities in the other media.
Regarding V.Kuramshin
On 23 January 2012 at approximately 14.30hrs the police officers of the Interior Ministry Department for organized crime control of Zhambyl region have caught in the act and arrested Vadim Kuramshin inside the Kordai district Prosecutor’s office building. The personal search of him revealed KZT 45,000 and USD 200 and USD 10,000 that he received by means of extortion from the Assistant of the district Prosecutor Mr.Mukhtar Uderbaev.
V.Kuramshin received the extorted money (for non-dissemination of video footage that allegedly could incriminate Mr.M.Uderbaev) in two steps: KZT45 000 and USD
According to this, the local investigating body filed a criminal case against V.Kuramshin under conditions laid under para “b”, part 4, Article 181 of the Criminal Code (extortion at a large scale) on 23.01.2012.
As authorized by the court on 24.01.2012, V.Kuramshin was assigned a preventive measure in the form of “arrest”.
A final indictment was brought against V.Kuramshin on 13.03.2012.
The criminal case proceedings were closed on 20.03.2012.
The prosecutor’s office took the case of an accused V.Kuramshin to court on 29.03.2012.
On 28.08.2012 the Zhambyl region specialized inter-district court on criminal cases has reclassified actions of V.Kuramshina and he was sentenced under part 1, Article 327 of the Criminal Code (arbitrariness) to 1 (one) year of confinement and taking into account the time he has already served in the custody, he was released from custody in the courtroom on the basis of part 3, Article 62 (calculation of sentences terms and punishments setoff). At the same time, the court has changed a restraint measure in the form of ‘arrest’ into ‘recognizance not to leave’ and ‘good behavior’ until the sentence comes into effect.
In accordance with Article 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the court has taken a written undertaking by V.Kuramshin not to leave the place of permanent residence (town of
Prosecutor lodged a protest on indicated sentence while the aggrieved party filed a complaint in the form of appeal.
On 31.10.2012 the specialized inter-district criminal court of Zhambyl region cancelled its sentence as of 28.08.2012 regarding V.Kuramshin issued under part 1, Article 327 of the Criminal Code (arbitrariness) and sent a criminal case for new trial in the same court in another composition.
At the request of the involved Prosecutor, a restraint measure in the form of ‘recognizance not to leave’ and ‘good behavior’ by the first-instance court was modified to the form of ‘arrest’.
This application made for the following reasons.
According to the verified information, V.Kuramshin left
The above fact constitutes a violation by V.Kuramshin the condition on ‘recognizance not to leave’ and given a written undertaking not to leave a permanent residence without the permission of the court, it can be a basis for changing of a restraint measure to more severe one.
According to part 3, Article 143 of the Criminal Procedure Code, in case of actions implemented by a person and for prevention of which there were applied measures stipulated under Article 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code, a more severe preventive measure is applied to such a person.
In case of cancellation of the sentence, V.Kuramshin regains the procedural position of a defendant put on trial under para “b”, part 4, Article 181 of the Criminal Code (extortion at a large scale) to whom a measure of restraint in the form of arrest is applied.
Thus, a protest of public prosecutor and a complaint of an aggrieved are satisfied.
A resolution of the appellate court came into force from the moment of its announcement and therefore it was communicated to the Zhambyl and the North Kazakhstan regions Heads of interior departments to implement the change of a preventive measure to the form of ‘arrest’.
Thus V.Kuramshin detained and arrested on 31.10.2012 by the officers the
The Zhambyl region specialized inter-district criminal court completed a judicial investigation on a criminal case and announced a verdict of the jury on 07.12.2012 by which V.Kuramshin found guilty under para “b”, part 4, Article 181 of the Criminal Code (extortion at a large scale) and sentenced to 12 years of imprisonment with confiscation of property and sentence be served in the high-security penal colony.
In accordance with para ‘b’, part 3, Article 13 of the Criminal Code (repetition of crimes), actions of V.Kuramshina considered as especially dangerous repetition of crimes.
Due to disagreement on the sentence by the Specialized inter-district court of Zhambyl region announced on 07.12.2012, V.Kuramshin sentenced his appeal to the Zhambyl regional court on 23.12.2012.
Consideration of the appeal will be held on 14.02.2013.
Since his arrival up to now, a convicted V.Kuramshin contained in the cell No.47, post No.5, building No.2 of the regional correctional facility No.158/1.
Complaints and appeals against actions of correctional facility No.158/1 are not reported.
The regional prosecutor’s office staff weekly examines observance of prison regime and detention conditions of V.Kuramshin.
Testimonial:
Vadim Kuramshin’s previous convictions:
1) On 22.09.1999 sentenced by the Court of Petropavlovsk under Article 177 part 2, paragraph “a, b” (fraud committed a) by a group of persons by previous concert and b) repeatedly); Article 177 part 3, “b” (fraud at a large scale), Article 325 part 3, 37 of the Criminal Code (forgery, manufacture or sale of forged documents, stamps, seals, forms, state awards; part 3) wittingly/deliberately using of fake documents) sentenced to 7 years and 6 months of imprisonment with the effect of 09.11.1999. Released on 01.02.2003 by the decision of the Kyzylzhar District court of the
2) On 26.09.2006 sentenced by the Court of Petropavlovsk under Article 129 part 2 of the Criminal Code (defamation including libel and slander contained in a public speech or a publicly printed work or in the media) to 1 (one) year of restriction of liberty; the verdict has come into effect on 14.11.2006. Based on part 1, Article 60 and para “b”, part 1, Article 61 of the Criminal Code by adding the term of his sentence as of 22.09.1999 to the already served term of 3 years and 10 months in prison, that offence was recognized as repetition of offences under Article 13, part 1 of the Criminal Code.
3) On 24.11.2006 sentenced by the Court of Petropavlovsk under Article 325, part 3 of the Criminal Code (forgery, manufacture or sale of forged documents, stamps, seals, forms, state awards; part 3) wittingly/deliberately using of fake documents) to 180 hours of public works. Based on Article 58, part 6 of the Criminal Code, this sentence was absorbed by the sentence as of 26.09.2006 to serve 3 years and 10 months of imprisonment with confiscation of property; the verdict came into effect on 09.01.2007. Based on the Article 13, part 1 of the Criminal Code (repetition of offences), that action was recognized as repetition of offences.
Regarding R.Tuletayeva
The Aktau city court passed the sentence as of 04.06.2012 against R.Tuletayeva together with the others and convicted her under part 1 Article 241 of the Criminal Code of Kazakhstan to 7 years of imprisonment for organizing riots that took place in the city of Zhanaozen on 16—17 December 2013.
In the course of the criminal proceedings, the defendant R.Tuletayeva and her advocate G.Zhuaspayeva have filed applications to make inspection concerning the use of torture against them by the police.
This petition was satisfied by the court and it decided to conduct examination by the regional prosecutor’s office.
The regional prosecutor’s office sent the said decision to the Department of Internal Security of the Interior to carry out the relevant checks.
Following the inspection results as of 02.05.2012 it was decided not to institute criminal proceedings on the facts of torture towards R.Tuletayeva since her and her advocate’s reasoning have not been proved.
As of 24.09.2012, advocate G.Zhuaspayeva acting on behalf of the convicted R.Tuletayeva has filed a private complaint with the Aktau City Court on abolition of the aforementioned decision.
As of 25.09.2012 the court issued an order granting an advocate G.Zhuaspayeva the time frame for bringing her complaint in accordance with the requirements of the Criminal Procedure Law as well as provision of the additional materials.
However, the requirements have not been fulfilled and in this connection the court decided to dismiss the complaint while giving an explanation on the right to appeal this decision.
As of 01.11.2012, an advocate G.Zhuaspayeva acting on behalf of the convicted R.Tuletayeva has filed a repeated complaint with the Aktau City Court on abolition of the aforementioned decision of the regional interior dept. as well as an application on restoration of the appeal term.
As of 07.11.2012, the Aktau City Court returned the complaint of G.Zhuaspayeva without consideration as it missed deadlines for appealing against the actions and decisions of public bodies (3 months).
As of 06.08.2012, the appellate court modified the sentence and reduced the imprisonment term for R.Tuletayeva from 7 to 5 years. The judgment became final and in force.
By resolution of the court of appeal as of 19 October 2012 has upheld the court’s decision and dismissed the complaint.
Regarding protest actions in
In 2012 the country recorded 281 protest actions (48 authorized and 179 unauthorized), out of them 153 were socio-economic in nature and 128 had social and political character.
More than 28,000 people were attending these protests (there were 59 rallies, 1 march, 3 hunger strikes, 87 pickets, 7 strikes, 120 meetings and 8 other events).
At the same time, despite the fact that during those most of protests the participants criticized the government and its decisions on certain issues, 162 persons only made answerable under Article 373 of the Code of Administrative Liability (namely, 90 — fined, 56 — warned and 16 — administrative arrest), which is 0.5% of the total number of protesters.
Thus administrative responsibility has been imposed on those organizers of unauthorized protests against the public order coupled with clear disobedience to the lawful demands of the government official.
At the same time, an issue of to making participants of the abovementioned actions criminally liable under Article 164 of the Criminal Code of the
Along with that, it should be noted that the total number of operating non-profit organizations in
In addition, there are 10 political parties, which are also public associations, out of which three are present in the Parliament of the
Share on blogger Share on mymailru Share on vk Share on livejournal
ИСТОЧНИК:
Интернет-портал «Республика»
http://respublika-kaz.info/news/politics/31637/
