TFR refuses non-urgent delivery – Picture of the day – Kommersant

The lawyers of the head of the Kurier trade union, Kirill Ukraintsev, complained to the Moscow prosecutor’s office about the capital’s department of the Investigative Committee. In an interview with Kommersant, they said that the investigator was “literally ignoring” the defense, which had only one day left – Monday, September 19 – to familiarize itself with six volumes of the case. Lawyer Veronika Polyakova points out that for many years of work she has never come across such a precedent.

Previously “b” told about the case of Kirill Ukraintsev, an opposition activist, head of the Kurier trade union (a community of deliveries, mainly from the Delivery Club). He was arrested in April; the investigation believes that Mr. Ukraintsev “published online calls” to couriers and taxi drivers to “go out to protest” against violations of their labor rights, including long salary delays. On this basis, the trade union leader was accused of “repeatedly violating the procedure for organizing or holding a rally” (Article 212.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, known as “Dadinskaya”, implies imprisonment from three to five years).

Lawyers for Kirill Ukraintsev told Kommersant that they faced inexplicable behavior of the investigation. According to them, there are six volumes in the criminal case, but the investigation has been “ignoring” the request of the defense since the beginning of September and simply does not give lawyers the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the charges.

It is worth clarifying: according to Russian law, the defense does not have unlimited access to the materials of criminal cases. They are kept by the investigator, and the court sets deadlines for lawyers and persons under investigation to familiarize themselves with all the arguments of the prosecution. In practice, this often does not look like constructive cooperation, but like a “find me” game: lawyers request case materials, but the investigation may not provide them under various pretexts, for example, referring to the absence of the necessary investigator at the workplace.

In the case of Kirill Ukraintsev, according to his lawyer Veronika Polyakova, such a situation has developed. But usually the investigation “leaves” to the defense about a week of time, and in this case, in fact, only one working day remained to familiarize themselves with the materials – the upcoming Monday. “I have never experienced anything like this. On Thursday, I sent a complaint to the Moscow prosecutor’s office and to the direct management of our investigator, ”Ms. Polyakova told Kommersant.

The appeals indicate that the investigation into the case of Kirill Ukraintsev was completed on August 31. Seven working days later, on September 8, Dinara Mamedova, an investigator of the Investigation Department for the Moscow SAO, applied to the Savelovsky Court of the capital with a request to limit the time for familiarizing the defense with the case. For some reason, Ms. Mammadova demanded a limit until September 9, that is, she asked the court to set a period of one day for studying six volumes. The court set a deadline until September 20 – by this day, the lawyers had to receive all the materials they needed for the defense, and on the 20th to sign a paper on familiarization.

However, Dinara Mammadova “disappeared,” lawyers say.

“My colleagues and I (Kirill Ukraintsev has four lawyers.— “b”) we call the investigative department, call the mobile phone, write in personal messages in instant messengers, we come to the investigative department. But the investigator does not answer, does not read the messages, and at the checkpoint control we are told that she is not there, ”said Ms. Polyakova.

Kommersant sent a request to the central office of the Investigative Committee of Russia, but did not receive a prompt response. It was also not possible to contact Vyacheslav Oslyakov, head of the investigative department for the Northern Administrative District of Moscow, at the phone number indicated on the website of the department – no one picked up the phone during Friday.

Ms. Polyakova admits that she does not understand how to resolve this situation: “Probably, we, the defenders, will be asked to sign a protocol on familiarization with the materials retroactively. We, accordingly, will write that we were not given time to familiarize ourselves. But how Dinara Mammadova will get out of this situation, I also have no idea.” Note that the Moscow prosecutor’s office has 30 days to consider the complaint.

Maria Starikova