effective nature of the investigation into the applicant's allegations of ill-treatment. In his letter the defence counsel alleged that police officers B. (last name) and V. (first name) had participated in the beating of the applicant. He further alleged that police officer B. had been exerting pressure on witnesses in the criminal case against the applicant. As a result, the witnesses had confirmed B.'s version of events, according to which the applicant fell and injured his jaw during his arrest.
32. By letter of 7 August 2001 the acting head of the Department for Supervision of Investigation at the Moscow City Prosecutor's Office (и.о. начальника Управления по надзору за следствием при прокуратуре г. Москвы) informed the applicant's defence counsel that the criminal case against police officers of Otradnoe Police Station was being examined by the Butyrskiy Inter-District Prosecutor's Office. The letter stated that "a medical examination had been carried out and a number of witnesses had been questioned". It was further stated that "the investigation was being supervised".
5. Decision to stay the investigation
33. On 23 August 2001 Investigator G. decided to stay the preliminary investigation of criminal case No. 5649 on the grounds that "the person against whom charges should be brought had not been identified".
34. On 18 September 2001 the applicant's mother applied to Investigator G. seeking to obtain a copy of the decision to stay the preliminary investigation.
6. Decision to resume the investigation
35. By letter of 28 September 2001 the Deputy to the Butyrskiy Inter-District Prosecutor (заместитель Бутырского межрайонного прокурора г. Москвы) informed the applicant's mother that the decision to stay the preliminary investigation had been set aside and that the investigation had been resumed and assigned to Investigator Ye. of the Butyrskiy Inter-District Prosecutor's Office of Moscow (следователь Бутырской межрайонной прокуратуры г. Москвы Е.). A letter along similar lines dated 1 October 2001 was received by the applicant's father from Investigator Ye.
36. By letter of 23 October 2001 the Moscow City Prosecutor's Office informed the applicant's defence counsel, in reply to his complaint about the ineffective nature of the investigation, that "the preliminary investigation had been resumed and the necessary investigative measures were being taken". The letter also stated that "no evidence of pressure by the police officers of Otradnoe Police Station on witnesses or on the applicant's family had been found". It was further stated that "the investigation was being supervised".
7. Decision to terminate the investigation
37. By letter of 28 October 2001 Investigator Ye. informed the applicant and his parents that:
"criminal proceedings No. 5649... have been terminated on 28 October 2001... owing to the lack of evidence of any crime having been committed."
38. It appears that the applicant's mother lodged an appeal against that decision with the Moscow City Prosecutor's Office.
8. Replies of the authorities to the applicant's complaints
and requests for access to the case file
39. On 9 November 2001 she also requested permission to familiarise herself with the materials in criminal case No. 5649.
40. By letter of 19 November 2001 she was informed by Investigator Ye. that:
"...The legislation does not permit the parties to criminal proceedings to obtain copies of the case-file materials.
According to the law, only the accused, the victim and their counsel have the right to familiarise themselves with the materials in the case file. Your status, as well as the status of [the applicant] and [his fat
> 1 ... 2 3 4 5 ... 10 11 12
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
