News

As usual in such cases, the evidence the defendants committed terrorism offences consists in their participation in meetings, discussion of ideological questions, and attempts to spread their ideas among other Muslims.

After he complained about the use of torture to him, he was accused of justifying terrorism, which allegedly consisted of reading poems to cellmates.

He is being prosecuted for political reasons solely because of his civil-society and political stance and for the non-violent realisation of the freedoms of expression, information and assembly.

The prosecution of Anastasia Shevchenko is politically motivated, intended to force her to abandon or change the character of her civil society activities as a political activist and critic of the current authorities.

As usual in cases of this kind, the evidence of terrorism was participation of the defendants in meetings, discussions of ideological questions and persuading other Muslims to adopt their views.

On January 28 and 29 the Shali City Court continued to examine the case against the director of the Grozny office of the Memorial Human Rights Center, Oyub Titiyev, for drug possession (part 2 of article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

As usual in such cases, evidence of terrorism by the defendants is their participation in meetings, discussion of ideological issues and agitation of other Muslims.

On January 21 and 22, the Shali City Court continued to examine the case against the director of the Grozny office of the Memorial Human Rights Center, Oyub Titiyev, for drug possession.

Our second survey considers prosecutions for involvement in Hizb ut-Tahrir, an international religious organisation that 15 years ago the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation ruled, on no evidence, to be a terrorist organisation.

The defense started presenting the written evidence.

The First Survey is entitled ‘Criminal prosecutions for terrorism in Russia and abuses by the state: how the system was created.’

He is likely to face inhuman treatment in his homeland.

Memorial considers Shakir Kozhamkulov, Islambek Kamchybekov, Uulu Kanybek Suiunduk, Bekzod Bakirov, Gazyek Kubatov, Akhmet Dzhumaev, Zufar Mustafin and Airat Usmanov to be political prisoners and demands their release.

On December 17 and 18 the Shali City Court continued proceedings on the case against the director of Memorial’s Grozny office, Oyub Titiyev.

 Weapons were planted on the defendants and they were charged with preparing an act of terrorism and sentenced to terms of between 11 and 12 years in prison 

Oyub won the award for «Human Rights and the Rule of Law» at a ceremony in Moscow.

Memorial Human Rights Centre has already recognised as political prisoners two of three defendants in the case of alleged attempts to organise civil unrest in Rostov-on-Don: Yan Sidorov and Vladislav Mordasov.

On November 26 and 27 the 24th and 25th days of proceedings on the case of Oyub Titiyev were held in the Shali City Court.

During the hearing, Mr. Titiyev talked in detail about how he was detained twice. First, officers in uniform with the «RRU» stripes, then police officers, forced a confession of drug possession, as he met Baskhanov, a witness in the case, several days before his arrest. He also spoke on the threats and surveillance of Oyub Titiyev and Memorial Human Rights Center that occurred during the investigation of the alleged extrajudicial execution of 27 residents of Chechnya.