Lawyers for Khadija Ismailova Lodged Complaint with Supreme Court

The lawyers for the journalist Khadija Ismailova do not agree with the decision of the Baku Court of Appeal (BCA), which upheld the sentence of imprisonment for a term of 7.5 years. The defense intends to file an appeal to the Supreme Court of Azerbaijan, told the lawyer Fakhraddin Mehdiyev.

Next the defense plans to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). This position was described in detail at the meeting on 25 November.

Ismayilova said at the beginning of the meeting that she has an oral addition to the appeal.

"The court verdict said that since I have no assets, nothing was confiscated. The country is in a difficult situation, oil prices have fallen, so I decided to voluntarily report on my property that can be seized," ironically remarked Ismayilova.

She further noted that she owns a mansion in a prestigious area of ??London.

However, the judge interrupted Ismayilova and demanded her to speak on the merits.

The next speaker was the lawyer Namazly. He pointed to the invalidity of the consideration of the appeal without holding a trial. The lawyer recalled that the Court of First Instance was put forward more than 30 petitions of the defense and none of them was satisfied.

Namazly declared groundless charges of Ismayilova with economic crimes, since she was not a financially responsible person at the radio and only took a part in the creative work.

Summing up his speech, he urged the court to acquit Khadija Ismailova.

The lawyer Fakhraddin Ismayilov pointed out that no financial document was signed by Ismayilova and in this case it is absurd to accuse her of embezzling, illegal business, or tax evasion.

"Khadija Ismayilova is accused on article 179 of embezzlement. But then, as provided by this article, there shall be the victims. But in fact there are no victims, there is not even a civil suit against Ismayilova. Khadija Ismayilova is accused of illegal business activities, as reflected in her activities without accreditation at the Foreign Ministry. But for the lack of accreditation there is not criminal, but only administrative responsibility. This criminal case is an example of "legal nihilism." All our petitions to the Court of First Instance were rejected. This is a spot for justice. This case will certainly shock the judges of the European Court of Human Rights as the judicial investigation on it is more like a Krylov fable," said the lawyer.

Ismayilova pointed out that despite the withdrawal of "incitement to suicide" from the charges, the verdict still includes the requirement to collect from her 364 manats for reimbursement for the "psychiatric evaluation."

The journalist noted that the preservation of this requirement suggests that the sentence was just copied from the indictment.

When the judge Ilgar Murguzov once again turned off the microphone of Ismayilova, she, getting the word, said: "You are too old to play the buttons."

Then she pointed out ito the "biased judicial investigation" in the Baku Court of Grave Crimes and noted:

"They should have established whether it was really a crime. The truth is that I was arrested for my journalistic activities and for investigating the business of Ilham Aliyev and his family members. If they had told me this at once, I would not have appealed," said Ismayilova.

The judge again interrupted her and demanded to speak to the point.

"In the 16 volumes it is actually written on embezzlement, but they have not found what I embezzled. I am an honest woman and even you do not want to believe that I have any property. In reality, the property noted at the beginning of the meeting does not belong to me, but to Leila Aliyeva," said further Ismayilova.

The judge in this place interrupted her and did not let her speak any longer.

The State Prosecutor Abbas Abbasli, stating that the charges had been proved, asked to uphold the verdict of the trial court.

In turn, the lawyer Namazly noted that Ismayilova was first arrested under Article 125 (inciting to suicide) and other charges were brought after three months.

He noted the need for the payment of state compensation to Ismailova for holding her in custody for three months.

The court, however, ignored the arguments of the lawyers and issued a decision rejecting the appeal and maintaining the verdict of the first instance in force and unchanged. -06C—