Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
[KavkazUzel] Despite the fact that the decision to release Leila Gatagazheva, 23, a native of Ingushetia, under house arrest was made in her favor, it is still a violation of the law, since the investigation period has been completed and she could not have been given a preventive measure at all, said lawyer Alaudi Musaev. As the "Caucasian Knot" wrote, in February the investigation excluded the article on aiding terrorist activities from the charges against native Ingushetia Leila Gatagazheva; now she is accused only of participation in an illegal armed group.
On April 27, the court decided to transfer her to house arrest, and Gatagazheva returned to Malgobek from the Pyatigorsk detention center, human rights activists reported.
Continued from Page 2
On May 14, the Supreme Court of Ingushetia granted the prosecutor's appeal to mitigate the preventive measure against Leila Gatagazheva and returned the girl to the pre-trial detention center for the second time. Her defense considered the return to the pre-trial detention center to be unjustified cruelty.
Leila Gatagazheva, born in 2001, is a mother of two children, she was accused of aiding terrorist activities (Part 2 of Article 205.5 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and participation in an illegal armed formation on the territory of Syria (Part 2 of Article 208 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Relatives took her at the age of 12 from Ingushetia to the Middle East and married her there when she was 13 years old. She has already served five years in an Iraqi prison on a similar charge of working for Islamic State militants, said the defense, which is seeking to have the criminal case dropped.
Leila Gatagazheva was again released under house arrest on May 24. According to lawyer Alaudi Musaev, although this decision was made in favor of his client, it is a violation of the law, since the investigation period has been completed and Gatagazheva could not have chosen a preventive measure at all.
“We will appeal this decision too. Because she should have been released without a preventive measure at all. Because the investigation period expired on April 30, it was not extended. And all subsequent detentions, arrests and the like - they are all illegal. The prosecutor's office, in its submission, generally wanted Gatagazheva to be taken into custody. But they ordered house arrest until June 14. After this, Gatagazheva should be released completely,” Musaev told the “Caucasian Knot” correspondent.
According to him, a whole “Santa Barbara story” unfolded around the meeting on choosing a preventive measure.
“On May 23, unexpectedly, from an outside source, not from the court, Gatagazheva’s lawyers learned that a meeting on choosing a preventive measure would be held in the Malgobek court. Three of us lawyers went there. Luckily we were nearby. Arriving at the court, we learned that the case would be heard again by Judge Chapanova, who had already made a decision the previous time. Along with the prosecutor's office, we also appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of the Republic of Ingushetia (on house arrest). Because the judge did not have the right to choose any preventive measure. Since the investigation period of 12 months has expired. And this period was not extended by the chairman of the Investigative Committee or in court.
"Then, during the review, we reported a crime on the part of the investigator, who falsified the materials and issued a decision. The court found that the investigation period was not extended after 12 months, as required by law. Then, in the Supreme Court of Ingushetia, we also made a report about the crime from the investigator, prosecutor and judge. But the judge of the Supreme Court of Ingushetia, having canceled the house arrest order, took Gatagazheva into custody. And this is also a crime. Therefore, on May 23, we contacted the Chairman of the RF Investigative Committee about a crime committed by officials. Just at the time when we submitted our applications, we received information about the appointment of a court hearing. We were warned not a week or even a day in advance,” Musaev said.
According to him, the meeting did not start and, after waiting until 6 p.m., they came to the chairman of the court and challenged the judge. “Firstly, because she is our procedural opponent because of our reporting of the crime. Secondly, the investigation period has expired and no one can extend the preventive measure. At the same time, by chance, in the reception room we witnessed a conversation between two judges of the Malgobek court with their supervisor of their Supreme Court of Ingushetia. He put pressure on them, demanding that they make a decision on detention,” Musaev continued his story.
As a result, the challenge was accepted and a hearing was held on May 24; another judge decided to release Gatagazheva to house arrest. “As they say, in the steppe there’s meat for the beetle,” Musaev said.
In his opinion, Gatagazheva’s case may not reach consideration on its merits. “The prosecutor's office did not approve the indictment. And he wants to return the case for further investigation. But the investigator disputes this and does not want further investigation. But accepting the case in this form is suicidal for the court. Therefore, most likely, the case will be returned for further investigation. And there, perhaps, and we think so, the case should be terminated,” Musaev believes.
Mother and daughter Gatagazhev have never been to Syria, lawyer Ramina Labazanova told the "Caucasian Knot" correspondent.
“Leila was taken by her mother and uncle to Iraq. Law enforcement agencies, of course, have questions for them. But his uncle is no longer alive, and Leila’s mother is wanted. She did not return to the Russian Federation. The children lived with their grandmother,” she explained.
We rarely see anyone being forced to get married before the age of 18.
Taking a mother’s minor daughter to another country in itself is not a crime, noted coordinator of the Marem movement Katerina Neroznikova.
“When going abroad, Leila’s mother could take her. Our law enforcement does not allow us to find out from a child about his desire to leave. As for getting married at this age, according to Russian laws this is an offense. This would be a crime if it happened on Russian territory and forced marriage could be proven. As for the laws of Iraq, I don’t know. Can this be called slavery? Maybe. This is a situation of lawlessness, close to slavery. Because she had no right to choose whether to go or not to go with her mother. And it is very doubtful that she had a choice whether to get married or not, to have children or not at that age,” Neroznikova said.
According to her, in the regions of the North Caucasian Federal District there is almost no problem of forced early marriage. “We rarely encounter anyone being forced to get married before the age of 18. But forced marriages of girls over 18 do occur. When girls’ parents want to marry them off without her consent. To the point where a girl living abroad is deceived into inviting homeland and are forced into marriage there. Every third appeal to Marem concerns forced marriage,” noted Neroznikova.
|
