Log in

Жалоба в Европейский суд по правам человека (ЕСПЧ)(продолжение 1) 
8th-Aug-2013 12:20 pm
патриот, адвокат, бывший политзаключённый, русский, Котов
Начало см.: http://kotov-s-l.livejournal.com/243540.html

(Indiquer ci-après le nom de l’Etat / des Etats contre le(s) quel(s) la requête est dirigée)
(Fill in the name of the State(s) against which the application is directed)
(Укажите название государства, против которого направлена жалоба)

13. Российская Федерация


(Voir chapitre II de la note explicative)
(See Part II of the Explanatory Note)
(См. Раздел П Инструкции)

Brief summary on Mr. Kotov person

Sergey Leonidovich Kotov is a Russian 54 years old (born in 1954), magister of law, lawyer and human rights activist.
Mr. Kotov is not a member of any political party. He is married and has two sons – 1980 and 1983 years of born. The elder is a student – journalist. The junior is a prominent violinist, prize-winner of Russian and international competitions.
After finishing secondary school in 1971 he worked as an electrician, attending evening classes of Sverdlovsk Institute of Law.
In 1972-1974 he served in the Soviet Army. After demobilization he continued studies in Sverdlovsk Institute of law, graduating in 1978.
In 1978-1980 Mr. Kotov worked in the Internal affairs department of Sverdlovsk Regional Counsel Executive Committee.
In 1980 he was delegated to work in the Verh-Isetsk regional Communist party (CPSU) committee of Sverdlovsk. During his work in the regional CPSU committee he was dismissed three times for criticism but later restored by court. After the last restoration, the regional CPSU committee has to promote him to join the Sverdlovsk Lawyers Association(the Bar), a member of which he remains up to now.
Colleagues and general public know Sergey Kotov since mid-80-ties as a person of distinct civic position and developed sense of justice. He proved himself as a gifted professional, a calm, orderly, persistent and reasonable person, successfully combining rich experience and profound professional knowledge in his chosen sphere of activity with scrupulous and if necessary selfless and tough upholding of legality based on rigorous adherence to the rule of law and firm ethical principles. Due to these qualities, Mr. Kotov is always a serious and uncompromising opponent of his judicial (legal) adversaries and unfair judges, thus not infrequently provoking
wild irritation on the part of the latter resulting in far-fetched prosecutions against him. In different periods among his clients were people of various beliefs and political standing that were subject o harsh illegal and often politically motivated persecution by the authorities. In this connection one could mention the widely famed in Russia and USSR cases of Peoples judge from Sverdlovsk (now Ekaterinburg) Leonid Kudrin and independent journalist from the same city Sergey Kuznetsov (http://delo.freeservers.com) , member of the Democratic Union party from the city of Tver T.Tselikova (http://pics.livejournal.com/kotov_s_l/pic/0001wa0s/), a leader of the same party Valerya Novodvorskaya, case of the Moscow City Counsel (MCC) against the Prosecutor of Moscow Genady Ponomaryov in connection with his appeal against the decision of MCC on December 21, 1992 to hold reelections of the Mayor of Moscow instead of Y.Liuzkov (http://pics.livejournal.com/kotov_s_1pic/0001ag7k/g39), cases of KGB major Baklanov, “KGB agent” Kamynin, head of the Peoples National party of Russia Alexander Ivanov-Sukharevsky. These and many other similar cases were carried on by Mr. Kotov practically disinterestedly, largely at his own expense and often demanded exhausting trips around the country.
Quite often these lawsuits were carried on by Mr. Kotov under severe pressure of the authorities when all other lawyers refused to help the victims for their own reasons.
In recent years Sergey Kotov, after heading the regional public foundation “Russian business in defense of human rights”, became actively involved in defense of legal rights and interests of people working in the real sector of the economy and lacking necessary support from the structures of power.
Mr. Kotov lead explanatory work among the population on legal matters, actively, publicly and sharply criticizing and revealing facts of corruption by bureaucrats from law and order institutions, particularly those authorized to counter ethnically organized criminal groups that became a social scourge in Ekaterinburg and Sverdlovsk region (case of G.Mustafayev).
He also engaged himself in party work within the Peoples National party mobilizing public opinion to exert constitutional influence on the authorities in order to rectify the existing abnormal situation and keep the masses from extremist manifestations.
In connection with his professional activities Mr. Kotov was twice sentenced by courts to administrative arrests. In both cases relevant court decisions were later qualified as illegal by the Supreme Court of Russia.
Personal courage and high professionalism of lawyer Mr. Kotov were repeatedly acclaimed in Russia and abroad, particularly:
- in the report of the “Lawyers Committee for human rights” for 1991,p.158//330 Seventh Avenue New Уork 10001 (212)629-6170 in 2005 (http://pics.livejournal.com/kotov_s_l/gallery/0001ec8z);
- diploma of the trade union of employees of the internal affairs department of Sverdlovsk region in 2005 “For display of courage and active civil position in fighting corruption in law and order institutions and defense of police employees persecuted for their struggle against corruption”. As a result of our mutual efforts the regional procurator B. Kuznetsov was dismissed from his position, several criminal cases were launched and investigations of the facts of mass embezzlement in the rear services of the Sverdlovsk regional department of Internal affairs Ministry continue (http://pics.livejournal.com/kotov_s_l/pic/0001tez4);
- honorary diploma of the Bar of Sverdlovsk region (31.05.2005) “for high professionalism in defending legal rights and interests of citizens and organizations, for irreproachable lawyers service” (http://pics.livejournal.com/kotov_s_l/pic/0001x4pc/).

Really being an outstanding personality, Sergey Kotov is a person of genuine modesty lacking any power ambitions seemingly quite appropriate for him. In spite of his solid and, most important, well-deserved “capital” of popularity, Mr. Kotov did not demonstrate any special desire to use it for career advance or convert it into power. Since in 1986 he moved from a privileged position of an instructor of the Verkh-Isetsk regional CPSU committee to a job of a simple lawyer, Mr. Kotov never made serious efforts to climb to the echelons of power. There were only two exceptions. In 1990 he nominated himself as a candidate for election as Russia’s peoples deputy from Sverdlovsk national-territorial district №74 with the only aim to prevent election from the same district of notorious Boris Eltsin. Inhabitants of Sverdlovsk of that time remember well the passionate anti-Eltin rhetoric of Mr. Kotov’s public speeches and leaflets. As a former member of the party apparatus Mr. Kotov knew only too well the habits of this former first secretary of Sverdlovsk Region CPSU committee and understood the catastrophic consequences for the country Eltsins return to power could lead to. The second case was his attempt to get elected to the Ekaterinburg City Duma in 2000 in order to strengthen his position of resisting chaos and anarchy in the region.
Since 2004 Mr. Kotov was actively engaged in legal organizational work to form local structures of legal Peoples national party (It is legal entity too) in order to fight using parliamentary means the policies of anti-Russian genocide conducted in Russia by power usurpers of KGB-FSB and CPSU extract acting in the interests of big criminal business, corrupt bureaucracy and ethnic criminal groupings.
Since March 2006 lawyer Sergey Kotov is being prosecuted for his activities by local FSB and Public Prosecutors Office, fabricating a criminal case against him for allegedly creating an extremist organization and appeals for extremist actions. The authorities demagogically pin a standard label on him of a “Fascist” and “anti-Semite”, while he really is a courageous fighter not against any race but for freedom and real democracy of Russian people.
On June 22, 2007 lawyer Sergey Kotov was convicted to 4 years of jail by Leninsky region court of Ekaterinburg city.
Deputies of Russian State Duma Nicolas Kuryanovich (member of the Duma Security committee), Evgeny Roizman and Andrei Savelyev repeatedly drew the General Procecutor Yury Tchaika’s attention to the facts of illegal persecution of Sergey Kotov.
Among public bodies speaking out in his defense were the Lowers Chamber of Sverdlovsk region, Association of human rights organizations of the Ural region and other influential regional organizations.
Due to categoric prohibition by the authorities, independent opinions and comments on the persecution of Mr. Kotov only exceptionally appear in the printed and electronic media.
Sergey Kotov and his lawyers appealed against his sentence.
After confirming April 25, 2008 of the justless sentence by Sverdlovsk regional court Mr. Kotov has been detaining in Nidzny Tagil city prison camp (address see above) under very sever conditions.
Mr. Kotov was entered on The Russian Independent Researching Center list of 72 prisoners (http://a-center-iin.livejournal.com/), prosecuted in Russia for political reasons, which was refered to by Mr. A.Illarionov, former V. Putin adviser, who, during February 26, 2008 The Heritage Foundation hearings in Washington D.C. (http://www.heritage.org/Press/Events/ev022708a.cfm ; http://multimedia.heritage.org/mp3/Allison-022708a.mp3 ), called upon all of them to be immediately released.
For more information one may address to http://kotov-s-l.livejournal.com/


Кассационное определение Свердловского областного суда от 25 апреля 2008 г. является подложным, а потому – недействительным и не порождающим правовых последствий.

Кассационное определение судебной коллегии Свердловского областного суда по уголовным делам от 25 апреля 2008 г. в отношении моего подзащитного, утверждившее обвинительный приговор Ленинского районного суда г. Екатеринбурга от 22 июня 2007 г. по ст. 282-1 и ч. 1, 280 ч.1 УК РФ к 4 годам лишения свободы в колонии общего режима, является подложным.

А. В оглашённом 25 апреля 2008 г. в зале судебного заседания Свердловского областного суда после возвращения судей из совещательной комнаты документе, выданном за «кассационное определение», полностью отсутствовали такие предусмотренные п.п. 5, 6 и др. ч. 1 ст. 388 УПК РФ обязательные элементы кассационного определения, как изложение доводов стороны защиты, возражений против них; мотивов принятого решения (фактологическое и правовое обоснование оставления приговора без изменения, а кассационных жалоб без удовлетворения); решение о мере пресечения и др., в связи с чем оглашённый документ не может рассматриваться в качестве кассационного определения и порождать как таковой каких-либо правовых последствий.
Таким образом, из содержания и формы оглашённого документа (см. прилагаемые стенограмму и аудиозапись судебного заседания 23-25 апреля 2008 г. в разделе VII «с» настоящей жалобы) следует, что провозглашённое судебной коллегией определение не было обосновано и являлось, произвольным, постановлено с нарушением требований ст.ст. 87 и 88 УПК РФ, т.е. без проверки и оценки существенных, обстоятельных, совершенно конкретных, подкреплённых многими бесспорными доказательствами многочисленных доводов защиты о юридической и фактической несостоятельности обвинительного приговора.
В оценке доказательств, таким образом, судьи были несвободны (зависимы и пристрастны): в нарушение требований ч.ч. 1 и 2 ст. 17 УПК РФ не исходили и не могли исходить из внутреннего убеждения, которое основывается на совокупности имеющихся в уголовном деле доказательств; не руководствовались законом и совестью; приняли сторону обвинения, придав её возражениям заранее установленную силу.
Судебной коллегией Свердловского областного суда были демонстративно попраны такие основополагающие принципы уголовного судопроизводства, как состязательность сторон и их равноправие перед судом (ст. 15 УПК РФ), обеспечение обвиняемому права на защиту (ст. 16 УПК РФ).
По своему содержанию и форме оглашённый в зале судебного заседания документ не отвечает признакам кассационного определения, перечисленным в ч. 1 ст. 388 УПК РФ в её конституционно-правовом истолковании, так как,

в о – п е р в ы х, «реализация права на справедливое судебное разбирательство невозможна, если суд не выслушал и не оценил по существу все аргументы, представленные в ходе судебного процесса его участниками со стороны обвинения и защиты, и не обеспечил им равные процессуальные права»;
в о - в т о р ы х, «требования справедливого правосудия и эффективного восстановления в правах применительно к решениям вышестоящих судебных инстанций также предполагают обязательность фактического и правового обоснования принимаемых ими решений, в том числе обоснования отказа в отмене или изменении обжалуемого судебного акта, что невозможно без последовательного рассмотрения и оценки доводов соответствующей жалобы»;
в т р е т ь и х, «предписания уголовно-процессуального закона не предоставляют суду кассационной или надзорной инстанции возможность игнорировать или произвольно отклонять доводы жалобы, не приводя фактические и правовые мотивы отказа в удовлетворении заявленных требований» (пп. 2 и 3 определения Конституционного Суда РФ от 8 июля 2004 г. № 237-О) (выделено мной – адв.).
В определении Конституционного Суда РФ специально акцентируется, что иное понимание ч. 1 ст. 388 УПК РФ представляет собой не только грубое нарушение права на судебную защиту, предусмотренного нормами статьи 46 (части 1 и 2) Конституции Российской Федерации, но и норм ст. 6 Конвенции о защите прав человека и основных свобод и ст. 14 Международного пакта о гражданских и политических правах, согласно которым «каждый при рассмотрении любого предъявленного ему уголовного обвинения имеет право на справедливое и публичное разбирательство дела в разумный срок независимым и беспристрастным судом, созданным на основании закона, исходя из презумпции невиновности обвиняемого и при предоставлении ему и его защитнику процессуальных возможностей по отстаиванию своей позиции» (выделено мной – адв.).
This page was loaded Feb 24th 2017, 6:12 am GMT.