The Sovetsky District court of Nizhny Novgorod will examine Andronovs’ case on the 13th of September

Событие | Пресс центр

17 August 2007

At the preliminary hearing of the case judge Tatiana Kuzina examined a number of technical questions necessary for the case preparation for the new examination on the merits.

As you may remember, the ground for the the appeal for compensation for non-pecuniary damage that was made to minor Dmitry Andronov was his unlawful detention.

On the 9 of March 2007 the Nizhny Novgorod regional court ruled to free Mr. Andronov from detention, but the detention facility administration refused to do so alluding to the end of workday. Mr. Andronov was released only after a day.

You may also remember that the applicant and his relatives are represented in court by the lawyers of the Committee Against Torture. Besides, the Committee specialists are holding a public investigation on the Andronovs’ claim that states that the boy was cruelly tortured by the policemen and prosecution officers of the city Pavlovo.

In the course of the preliminary hearing the federal judge Kuzina decided to recognize the detention facility 52/1 that had been considered a third party as a co-defendant in this case.

The representative of the guardianship authorities that was present at the hearing supported the position of the Committee specialists actively, and welcomed the decision, pointing out, that the rights of minor Andronov in the situation examined had surely been violated by the detention facility.

In the course of hearing the court asked the representative of the detention facility whether the fact that a person freed by the court decision was kept in prison because the work day of the detention facility officials was over, corresponded to the international law. The representative of the detention facility admitted that that was a violation of the international law.

The judge also touched upon the details of Mr. Andronov’s release that took place on the 10 of March 2007. It was proved, that the court decision to release Mr. Andronov was brought to the detention facility on the 9 of March by a court official, but it was not accepted. Meanwhile, the next morning Mr. Andronov was released by the order of vice-prosecutor of the region, Tkachev. This situation caused the federal judge to ask quite an expected question: why did the administration of the detention facility execute the decisions of the prosecutor’s office immediately but ignore the court decisions? This is one more question to answer at the case hearing that will take place on the 13 of September.