An important court ruling in Russia

Human rights activists, lawyers, and bloggers in the North Caucasus view the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (SC RF), which permitted lawyers to bring dictaphones and cameras into correctional facilities, positively.

The decision to lift the ban on bringing dictaphones and cameras was made on 7 February. Once the full text of the ruling is ready, the parties may challenge it in the appellate instance of the SC RF, a representative of the Supreme Court press service informed a ‘Caucasian Knot’ correspondent.

On 7 February, the Supreme Court granted the petition of prisoner Sergei Mokhnatkin, who was convicted on charges of assaulting a police officer during a rally on Triumfalnaya Square, and lifted the ban preventing lawyers from bringing audio and photo equipment into correctional facilities.

The grounds for the lawsuit arose from the ban on bringing in a camera, which Mokhnatkin’s lawyer, Valery Shukhardin, encountered. The lawyer wished to document the health condition of his client, who had declared a hunger strike and was placed in a pre-trial detention centre for 40 days. Mokhnatkin, sentenced to two and a half years for using force against a police officer during a ‘Strategy-31’ rally, declared a hunger strike in protest against regular disciplinary measures.

It is worth noting that the court’s decision was made contrary to the position of the Ministry of Justice and the Prosecutor General’s Office, which insisted on maintaining the ban.

“This is a positive decision, which is very important for people engaged in legal practice, especially in the Caucasus,” notes Yelena Denisenko, a representative of the Human Rights Centre ‘Memorial’ in Dagestan.

Previously, lawyers sometimes had to violate this ban, bringing a camera into pre-trial detention centres and temporary holding facilities to photograph the injuries of their clients, says Rustam Matsev, a lawyer from Karachay-Cherkessia.

“Although I was seen with a camera when I entered, I explained that I had the right to bring it. According to amendments to the federal law, I simply did not have the right to use the camera in the same room as the client. And they (the staff of the pre-trial detention centre and holding facility — Editor’s note, ‘Caucasian Knot’) could not verify this during our confidential conversations,” notes Rustam Matsev.

The Supreme Court’s decision is timely, asserts lawyer Sapiyat Magomedova. She shared a case from her practice with a ‘Caucasian Knot’ correspondent:

“Once, in pre-trial detention centre No. 1 in Makhachkala, I handed over my mobile phone at the checkpoint. I was surprised to see my colleagues inside the detention centre premises holding phones. They explained to me that there is a decision by the Kirovsky District Court of Makhachkala, according to which the requirements to surrender phones and laptops in the detention centre are illegal. However, after some time, I was asked again to surrender my phone at the checkpoint in the detention centre, citing an order from the Bailiff Service. Which, as it turned out, contained only a requirement to execute the Kirovsky Court’s decision to lift the ban on bringing in phones and laptops,” recounts Sapiyat Magomedova.

Users of the ‘Facebook’ social network and participants in the groups ‘Journalists of Dagestan’ and ‘Human Rights of Dagestan’ also evaluate the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation’s decision positively.

“Moreover, there is a ruling by the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (Editor’s note, ‘Caucasian Knot’) that it is permitted to bring in a phone. It is just that not everyone knows about this and surrenders it out of habit… It seems they were planning to bring legislation into compliance with the Constitutional Court’s ruling. But the Ministry of Justice and the Prosecutor’s Office are against it — we shall see what the final outcome will be,” notes Facebook user Mansur Lieberman.

“But in general, is it really possible to photograph injuries, take them out, and publish these pictures in the media?” asks a user under the nickname Daizy Di.

“On one hand, we must counteract police lawlessness. But on the other, falsification is possible if there is no full and legal medical examination, which would allow for proof that there were both beatings and torture,” states Svetlana Anokhina, a participant in the Facebook discussion.