Unequal Court in the case of Avaz Zeynalli

The first round of politically motivated trials in the case of the chief editor of the opposition newspaper "Khural", Avaz Zeynalli, ended  on August 1, and the judges declared a six-week break.

 Zeynalli is accused of blackmail by extortion under Articles 311.3.3 and 311.3.4 of the Criminal Code. He can be imprisoned for 12 years, but international human rights organizations already consider him a prisoner of conscience.  These are answers of the Director of the Media Rights Institute, a lawyer Rashid Hajili, on he results of the previous hearings.

  Q: Avaz Zeynalli was arrested at the request of the deputy Gular Akhmedova. Subsequently, the question was raised about previous lawsuits against the newspaper "Khural", and its chief editor. The talk is about three claims: by the director of publishing house "Azerbaijan" Agabek Askerov, director of the Foundation  for Media State Support  under President of Azerbaijan Republic, Vugar Safarli,  and  a singer Nushaba Aleskerli (Humbatova.)

   Why did suddenly the situation change so drastically? The impression is that the main initiator of the arrest Gular Akhmedova remained on the sidelines. Akhmedova appeared in court only once. Were there any evidence presented at trial on extortion money from her by Avaz Zeynalli?

    Answer: The reason for the lawsuit against the chief editor of "Khural» newspaper became a complaint from Akhmedova to the General Prosecutor Office on October 19, 2011. On the basis of that complaint,   next day the Office to Combat Corruption filed a lawsuit. 

 Akhmedova noted in her complaint that Zeynalli demanded a large sum of money for not publishing in his newspaper disgrace information about her. Despite the duration of the investigation, they investigation did not manage to determine the materials disgracing and denigrating the dignity of Akhmedova.  The investigation refers to records of conversations of Avaz Zeynalli with Gular Akhmedova on mobile phones and on Dictaphone, as well as received from the mobile operator record the conversation, as well as text messages. Neither one of these records by Avaz Zeynalli have blackmail or extortion by threats.

  On the contrary, many people remember that at that time, in August-September 2011, Zeynalli wrote in his newspaper, that Gular Akhmedova offered assistance to the newspaper. Instead, she asked to criticize some officials, but Zeynalli rejected her assistance. 

Interestingly, blackmail and threats took place in August, but the MP of the ruling party Gular Akhmedova, filed a complaint only two months later - on October 19.  She was unable to explain the reasons. 

Gular Akhmedova come to court to testify, but she could not give full testimony.  Because she was the main prosecution witness, there were a lot of questions for her. On the other hand, for some reasons, Akhmedova was questioned by the court in the absence of the accused. Interrogation of Akhmedova with participation of Zeynalli was a halved. Of course, the judges promised Avaz Zeynalli to ensure attendance in court of Gular Akhmedova, where she must complete testimony.

Despite the fact that criminal proceedings were initiated, and there were very little and insufficient materials for the prosecution, the prosecution case filled the case with other episodes and other crimes. As a result, the subject of discussion was the other episodes "of bribery," which quickly were concocted. So, after the arrest of Avaz Zeynalli on the claim from Akhmedova, there appeared other complaints in the Office of the Anti-Corruption, from some persons, who a few years ago, allegedly also "gave him a bribe." These people could not explain why until now they have to hide these facts and did nothing?

 Protection believes that all criminal cases are subject to the same goal - suppression of freedom of expression of the journalist.  Avaz Zeynalli noted many times that this process began after his criticism of the dignitaries. The attack on Zeynalli intensified after he decided to publish his newspaper not weekly, but daily.

Q: The trial deals with only three lawsuits on property damage - from Nushaba Aleskerli, Agabek Akserov, and Vurag Safarli. The fourth claim of the head of presidential administration Ramiz Mehdiyev is deliberately ignored. Did Mehdiyev withdraw his claim?

A: A year before the current trial, that is, on October 25, 2010 a lawsuit was filed against Avaz Zeynalli due to failure of court decisions. The case was formally launched on the basis of a court decision to publish refutations against Nushaba Humbatova, as well as not paying a court fines to the Director of the publishing house "Azerbaijan" Agabek Askerov. Then there was added an episode of non-payment of compensation appointed by a court for compensation to the Executive Director of the Foundation for Media State Support under President of Azerbaijan Vugar Safarli.  It is interesting that the episode of the court on the order for payment of 10,000 manat for the moral damage of the head of presidential administration, Ramiz Mehdiyev, was not added to the case.  There are not documents on refusal of his claim by Ramiz Mehdiyev.

Q: Were the charges in connection with claims in court substantiated?

Answer: Avaz Zeynalli was charged under Article 306.2 of the Criminal Code for failure of court decisions. Allegedly, he did not publish a refutation about the singer Nushaba Humbatova, and did not apologize. Then he was accused of not paying compensation to Agabek Askerov. The third episode concerns the payment for damage to Vugar Safarli, as well as the publication of denial and apologizes.

Due to the absence in the case of the text of denials, approved by the court, with respect to Nushaba Humbatova, Zeynalli in all his official explanations said he was willing to publish the text of denial, agreed by the parties. However, neither the plaintiff, nor bailiffs put forward any suggestions about the text of denial.

In the case of Agabek Askerov, Avaz Zeynalli published a refutation and paid 600 manat of compensation out of 1,000 manat. The law does not provide for criminal prosecution for failure to comply with the requirements of the property. For this reason, I think it is illegal a lawsuit in this episode and the prosecution on it. In the case of N. Humbatova, as I said, Zeynalli is ready to refute, and the talk is just simply about an agreed text of the refutation.

With regard to criminal proceedings concerning the enforcement of court decisions in the case of Vugar Safarli, it is generally absurd. In such cases the law provides for criminal prosecution prior to the adoption of certain measures, including administrative responsibility, administrative penalties. Only if the judgment is not satisfied, you can start a criminal prosecution. In the case of Vugar Safarli, such measures were not taken. The implementation of the court decision was launched in July 2011. After a short time a criminal offense was made. For comparison, the execution in the case of N.Humbatova began in 2007, and in the case of Agabek Askerov - in 2008. Interestingly, no charges were put forward in the case of Ramiz Mehdiyev, although at the same time, persecution was launched in connection with Safarli case.

Q: What serious violations occurred in the trial against the Zeynalli in Baku Serious Crimes Court?

Answer: Avaz Zeynalli is kept in jail absolutely groundless. It is humiliating for the editor in chief of the famous newspaper. Despite our repeated requests, he is brought to the courtroom and led away in handcuffs. The preventive measure has not been changed despite numerous appeals.

Another problem is the refusal to issue copies of the materials to protection. Despite repeated requests, a copy of only some materials was issued. Copy of significant materials has not been issued, and that prevents good preparation of protection.  The prosecution has a full version of the documents, and the defense - does not have. This creates unequal conditions. 

In addition, despite repeated requests, the court does not conduct at least audio judicial interrogation and the transcript. There are only court records, which reflect only a small part of what is happening in the court, but court decisions should be based on the ascertained trial evidence. Any word sounded in the court is important; it should be fixed without the interpretations and distortions. Otherwise, the court will pass decisions on the basis of the documents and the testimony collected by the prosecution, because court will not have its own materials. Audio recording is very important for protection. It is difficult to protect without listening to a high quality audio recording. Thus, under these conditions only prosecution can win, which has an extensive preparation, documentation and collection of evidence. The court will have nothing, except for those records that the court clerk managed to make. -05В-