Monitoring of the case of Andrey Tatarintsev (session 08.27.2020)

On August 27, 2020, in the Kuibyshevsky District Court of the Zaporozhye Region, an open court hearing was held in the case of businessman Andrey Tatarintsev, who is accused of committing crimes under Part 1 of Article 258-3, part 5 of Article 27, part 2 of Article 28, part 2 of Article 437, part 1 of Article 438 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (financing a terrorist organization, complicity in the conduct of an aggressive war, cruel treatment of prisoners of war and the civilian population).

According to lawyer Vladimir Lyapin, in 2014-2015, the accused traded gasoline at a tank farm located on the territory uncontrolled by the Ukrainian government, and was obliged by the armed persons (who represented themselves as the military of the unrecognized DPR / LPR republics) to transfer fuel to the ambulance station and other facilities.

Andrey Tatarintsev suffers from type 2 diabetes. During the monitoring of this trial, the ISHR repeatedly recorded that during the three years of detention, the accused did not receive medical care and dietary food necessary for his illness.

Experts from the International Society for Human Rights continue to monitor this trial.

The hearing began with the fact that the presiding judge V.A. Malevanny informed about the absence of judge G.Y. Valigursky, which made it impossible to consider the case in essence. However, since on August 29 the term of the measure of restraint assigned to Tatarintsev expired, judge V.A. Malevanny decided to consider the issue of extending the measure of restraint alone, in accordance with the transitional provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.

The lawyer V. Lyapin announced the challenge of the collegium. The defense lawyer explained that on August 21, 2020, endocrinologist Svetlana Tovstyga examined the accused in remand prison No. 11. As a result, a worsening of the patient’s condition was once again recorded (varicose veins appeared on the legs, etc.), treatment and dietary food for diabetics were prescribed (table No. 9), however, over the 6 days that have passed since that moment, the medical unit of the remand prison did not follow the doctor’s recommendations, in which the lawyer and the accused see signs of torture. The court has repeatedly passed rulings on the need to provide Tatarintsev with treatment and dietary nutrition, however, the implementation of the rulings is not monitored, measures of judicial control are ignored by the board, and the duty to guarantee the health and life of the defendant is not being fulfilled. In this regard, the lawyer believes that the court does not fulfill its procedural duties, is prejudiced and, accordingly, cannot pass a lawful and fair sentence.

The International Society for Human Rights draws attention to the position of the European Court, which says that unjustified delays in the provision of medical assistance by the authorities to the applicant after the diagnosis of his illness, the failure to provide him with hospitalization for additional examination and inpatient treatment and further deterioration of his health are sufficient signs of serious failure of the respondent State to provide him with adequate medical assistance while in detention. This amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment, in violation of Article 3 of the Convention (“Garumov v. Ukraine”, § 46). In addition, Article 6 of the Convention says that the implementation of court decisions is part of the right to a fair trial. It is also a necessary condition for the rule of law, enshrined in Article 8 of the Constitution of Ukraine.

Judge V.A. Malevanny, as well as prosecutor A.S. Kozakevich stated that the challenge of the panel of judges can only be considered collegially, therefore this will be done at the next hearing, and at the moment only the issue of extending the measure of restraint under Article 331 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine will be considered. However, the lawyer noted that before considering the challenge of the collegium, the court cannot perform any procedural actions, and since the challenge is considered collegially, it is necessary to wait for all members of the collegium to appear in the session. The postponement of consideration of the issue of challenge is not provided for by any article of the Criminal Procedure Code. Since the judge was going to move on to extending the measure of restraint without considering the challenge and did not respond to repeated calls by the defense not to violate the current legislation, lawyer Lyapin asked for a break in order to summon representatives of the National Police to the courtroom. No break was granted, and judge V.A. Malevanny announced the transition to considering a measure of restraint. Then the lawyer called the police right from the courtroom and asked for a break in order to meet law enforcement officers. He was again refused and then he personally left the courtroom. After that, the judge announced a break, since it is prohibited by law to consider the issue of extending a measure of restraint without the presence of a defense lawyer.

The rapid response group accepted statements from the lawyer and the defendant regarding torture in the courtroom (according to the doctor’s recommendation, Andrei Tatarintsev had to take dietary food and prescribed medications 3 times by this time, but was not provided with either one) and the violation of the Criminal Procedure Code by the judge. The investigator, who arrived later, seized rations (sugar cookies, white bread and peanuts), which the diabetic A. Tatarintsev received in the pre-trial detention center, for examination, and also promised to withdraw the video recording of the court session in order to establish the fact of violation of the law by the court.

Since A. Tatarintsev’s health worsened, it was decided to call an ambulance. The paramedic recorded increased blood pressure (160X80) and more than doubled (than the norm) level of sugar (12.4). Since the ambulance is not provided with sugar-reducing drugs, he offered to take the patient to a medical facility. Despite the protests of the prosecutor, the court agreed with this and postponed the session to the next day, since the court agreed that the CPC does not allow considering the extension of the measure of restraint until the issue of the challenge of the collegium is resolved, which can only be done in the presence of all judges of the collegium.

The Court considers that it is the State’s responsibility to detain persons in conditions that respect human dignity, including the provision of necessary medical assistance (“Kalashnikov v. Russia”, § 95; “Wuhan v. Ukraine”, § 72). A sharp deterioration in the state of health of a person in places of detention inevitably casts doubt on the adequacy of the medical care available there (“Salakhov and Islyamova v. Ukraine”, § 129). Since the accused Andrei Tatarintsev has been reporting for a long time that he was not provided with the prescribed treatment and dietary food in the pre-trial detention center, and according to the results of the examination by an endocrinologist dated 08.21.2020, his condition worsened, experts of the International Society for Human Rights believe that a violation of Article 3 ECtHR (“No one shall be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”).

The next hearing is scheduled for August, 28. The International Society for Human Rights will continue to monitor this case.