Scandal at the trial in the case of PFPA activist: Victim "has forgotten" about his criminal record

A hearing in the case of  adviser to the head of the Popular Front Party Mamed Ibrahim took place  in the Narimanov District Court on January 29 under the chairmanship of Turgay Huseynov. The third and final victim in this case spoke today. M. Ibrahim was arrested on 30 September last year, based on the complaint of the former member of the Azerbaijan Popular Front Party Mikail Guliyev, and charged with disorderly conduct (221.1). Later this article was reclassified to a heavier Article 221.2.2.  According to the  lawyer Yalcin Imanov,  on 29 January, the third victim Mohammed Gurbanov at last came to the court.

According to investigators, Gurbanov tried to separate and Ibrahim  and Guliyev, member of the opposition allegedly insulted and punched in the chest. However, the defendant said that Gurbanov was not at the scene at all.

It is noteworthy that Gurbanov’s height is two meters, and  he admits that he is a boxer. Therefore, it is simply unrealistic  that  small Mamed Ibrahim could  cause him physical harm, the lawyer said.

Gurbanov gave testimony contradicting a preliminary investigation. So, today, Gurbanov said that Ibrahim cursed him,  though  at the investigation he  claimed that Ibrahim beat him. Gurbanov also said today that a few days after the incident he went to the police and wrote an application, although his application was not in the case file.

At the trial  the lawyer  asked Gurbanov whether he had been convicted previously, he gave e a negative answer.  However, the lawyer submitted a formal response from the Interior Ministry, which says that Gurbanov in 2012 was brought  to trial under  the Article 128 of the Criminal Code (intentional infliction of bodily harm.)

When Gurbanov’s lie became obvious  he  began to threaten the lawyer, and  said that "he used to beat  people like him."  The request  of the lawyer to attach to the case the letter from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and express  attitude to the victim giving a false testimony  were dismissed by the judge.

Another victim Guliyev refused to appeal against Ibrahim.

Another victim,  Oruj Veliyev, was unable to testify in court, explaining it  by his inability to perceive events. However, a defense motion to appoint a psychiatric examination  was not satisfied.

The next hearing on this case is scheduled for 1 February. -06B-