PROSECUTOR
REQUESTS
NEW EXPERT ANALYSIS IN ZALIPAEV CASE
Kavkazskii
Uzel, 26
August 2020
At the
court session
in the case of the Jehovah's Witness Yury Zalipaev from Maisky,
the state's
prosecutor filed a petition to order for this case yet another
expert analysis,
and the defense spoke out against it, the lawyer Anton
Omelchenko reported.
As
Kavkazskii Uzel has
written, the Maisky district court of Kabardino-Balkaria has
been considering
the case of Yury Zalipaev since 16 July 2018. While there has
been a break in
the sessions that has lasted more than a year. After the break,
on 9 July the
prosecutor did not appear in court and the session was
postponed. The court can
start the debates, but the petitions of the prosecution have
dragged out the
trial, Zalipaev's lawyers declared at the time. On 27 July, on
the basis of a
petition by the prosecutor, the court summoned experts for
questioning, who had
drawn a conclusion about the absence of evidence of extremism in
Zalipaev's
statements. On 24 August, the authors of the expert analysis
confirmed their
conclusions in court. The lawyer again pointed out that the
prosecution side
was dragging out the case unjustifiably.
The
prosecution
thinks that during his sermons in the Kingdom Hall (the worship
building of the
Jehovah's Witnesses) Zalipaev not only spoke disparagingly about
Muslims and
Orthodox but he also urged other Jehovah's Witnesses to beat
them. In addition,
according to the version of the prosecution, Zalipaev
distributed religious
literature that has been placed on the Federal List of Forbidden
Materials.
Zalipaev does not acknowledge guilt. He is free on his own
recognizance. The
defense insists that the forbidden literature was planted in the
worship
building.
Today in
court the
prosecutor requested the conducting of a new expert analysis for
the Zalipaev
case. "The state's prosecutor today declared that he did not
like the
conclusions of the second expert analysis," Zalipaev's lawyer,
Anton
Omelchenko, explained to a Kavkazskii Uzel correspondent.
He said
that the
state's prosecutor asked to assign a new expert analysis to
teachers of the
Bashkiria State University and the No. 106 lyceum of the city of
Ufa. "The
defense asked the court to refuse to grant the petition and it
stated a
challenge to such experts," the lawyer said.
The
court withdrew to
the conference room. The announcement of the court's order
regarding the new
expert analysis is scheduled for 28 August, Omelchenko reported.
[. . .]
Zalipaev
was charged
with inciting religious strife and with making calls for
extremist activity.
According to the expert analysis, "from the point of view of
religious
studies, statements that Zalipaev is accused of are not
consistent with the
spirit of the teaching of Jehovah's Witnesses," and "from the
position of linguistics, there are no calls in his statements."
In
January 2019, a
judge in the Maisky district court, on the basis of a petition
from the
prosecutor, closed a criminal case against Zalipaev, based on
the article in
part 1 of article 282 of the CC RF, because of the
decriminalization of actions
that fall under this article. Yury Zalipaev was granted the
right to
rehabilitation on the basis of this article, but an accusation
based on part 1
of article 280 of the Russian Criminal Code (public calls for
conducting
extremist activity) remained in force. (tr. by PDS, posted 26
August 2020)
EXPERTS
CONFIRM FOR
COURT THE ABSENCE OF EXTREMISM IN ZALIPAEV'S WORDS
Kavkazskii
Uzel, 24
August 2020
Today
in court the
authors of an expert analysis confirmed that materials of the
case of Jehovah's
Witness Yury Zalipaev from Maisky do not contain anything that
would permit
considering statements attributed to him to be extremist. A
lawyer indicates
that the side of the prosecution is unjustifiably dragging out
the trial.
As
Kavkazskii Uzel
has written, the judicial process on the indictment of Yury
Zalipaev has
dragged on for two years already. The Maisky district court of
Kabardino-Balkaria
has been considering his case since 16 July 2018. A break in
the sessions
lasted almost a year, from 19 July 2019 to 8 July 2020. On 9
July the
prosecutor did not appear in court and the session was
postponed. The court can
begin debates, but a petition by the prosecution dragged out
the process,
Zalipaev's lawyer declared at the time. On 27 July, on the
basis of the
prosecutor's petition, the court summoned for questioning the
experts who had
drawn the conclusion about the absence of evidence of
extremism in Yury
Zalipaev's statements.
The
prosecution
thinks that during his sermons in Kingdom Hall (worship
building of Jehovah's
Witnesses), Zalipaev not only spoke disparagingly about
Muslims and Orthodox
but also called other Jehovah's Witnesses to beat them.
Besides this, according
to the prosecution's version, Zalipaev distributed religious
literature that is
contained in the Federal List of Forbidden Materials. Zalipaev
does not
acknowledge guilt. He is free on his own recognizance. The
defense insists that
the forbidden literature was planted in the house of worship.
Today
in court
experts from the Russian Federal Center of Forensic Expert
Analysis under the
Russian Ministry of Justice were questioned: the director of
the laboratory of
forensic psychological expert analysis, Tatiana Sekerazh; the
director of the
laboratory of forensic linguistic expert analysis, Vitaly
Kuznetsov; and a
religious studies expert, Doctor of Sciences Roman Lunkin. The
questioning was
conducted with the help of a video conference link with the
Basman court of the
city of Moscow, where experts were located, Zalipaev's lawyer
Anton Omelchenko
told a Kavkazskii Uzel correspondent.
On 19
July 2019, on
the basis of a petition of the prosecution, the court ordered
a second complex
psychological-linguistic religious studies expert analysis for
the Yury
Zalipaev case. At a session on 8 July, the lawyer announced in
court the
conclusions of the experts: they did not find indicators of
extremism in
Zalipaev's statements. From their conclusions it follows that,
from the point
of view of religious studies, the statements that are
attributed to Zalipaev
are not consistent with the spirit of the religious teaching
of the Jehovah's
Witnesses, and from the position of linguistics, there are no
calls in the
statements. The expert recognized that the testimonies of
witnesses were a free
paraphrase of Zalipaev's words, and such a paraphrase that is
not confirmed by
the materials of the case is not suitable for conducting an
expert analysis,
the lawyer explained earlier. Earlier in the Zalipaev case a
similar expert
analysis was conducted in the Dagestan Center of Forensic
Expert Analysis.
However the defense concluded, and the prosecution also agreed
with this, that
it was not fully carried out.
"During
the
course of today's questioning, the experts made clear that
they strictly followed
expert methods and their conclusions are logically based
completely. The
experts confirmed the conclusions that the materials do not
permit finding an
extremist orientation in the statements ascribed to Zalipaev,"
Anton
Omelchenko explained.
He
said that today
after lunch an expert linguist from Makhachkala, Dinara
Adzhamatova, was
questioned. She acknowledged that the results of the complex
expert analysis
were more accurate.
After
the questioning
of the experts, the prosecutor's office requested another
postponement of the
judicial session for ten or more days.
"The
reason for
such a delay is not clear. And this will give a reason to
doubt the confidence
of the prosecution that they will be able to persuade the
court of Yury
Zalipaev's guilt," the lawyer noted.
He
said that the
court gave the representatives of the prosecution two days and
scheduled the
next session for 14.30 Moscow time on 26 August.
"The
defense
called attention to the fact that because of the dragging out
of the judicial
process, it will incur unreasonable costs. Besides, Zalipaev
is restricted to
not leaving his place of residence all this time," Anton
Omelchenko added.
The
delay in the
judicial process depends on the complexity and numerous
incidents of the case,
an independent lawyer, Mukhadin Kardanov, notes. "The length
of
investigation in a criminal case is an undefined concept,
according to the
Criminal Procedure Code of the RF. The legislature interprets
it as
'reasonable,' giving to participants in the process the
possibility of undertaking
all possible actions for confirming their lines, but it
forbids the abuse of
the time interval of this 'reasonableness," Mukhadin Kardanov
told a
Kavkazskii Uzel correspondent.
He
noted that he
recalls at least one case which the Supreme Court of
Kabardino-Balkaria had
under consideration over the course of five years. . . . (tr.
by PDS, posted 26
August 2020)
Editorial disclaimer: RRN does
not intend to certify the accuracy of information
presented in articles. RRN simply intends to certify the
accuracy of the English translation of the contents of the
articles as they appeared in news media of countries of
the former USSR.
If material is quoted, please give credit to the
publication from which it came. It is not necessary to credit
this Web page. If material is transmitted electronically, please
include reference to the URL,
http://www.stetson.edu/~psteeves/relnews/.