Accusation against Turan agency at Baku Serious Crimes Court

Baku/05.10.22/Turan: Last week on Monday, a correspondent of  Turan agency attended a meeting of the Baku Serious Crimes Court. The  court considered  the lawsuit of businessman Afgan Zeynalov against Nelli Fabrichnaya, the head of the personnel department of his company “Murov” TSK LLC, which performs construction contracts of “Dəmiryol” CJSC.

Fabrichnaya considers herself completely innocent, denies all accusations and claims that she did not appropriate 720,000 manats of unknown origin that belonged to Zeynalov. During the preliminary investigation, she confessed under pressure from the investigator and the accusing party.

The public significance of the trial on criminal charges

The  trial is of public importance, since during the judicial investigation of the conflict between the company's boss and his former employee, the peculiarities of the Azerbaijani practice of issuing state, profitable contracts for the execution of works (construction of roads and facilities for the railway) by government departments are clarified. The  trial shows the peculiarities of the organization of work in an Azerbaijani company, where the head of the company installs a personal safe in the apartment of a subordinate employee, hides large amounts of money in this safe, and then blames and beats her, accusing of stealing money,  and threatens  to take away her property. Moreover, in the audio recordings presented to the court and not yet considered by the court, the head of the company informs the subordinate on the phone about the intention to take away her apartment, and increases the amount of her debt to one million manats. Also,  in the audio messages, Afgan Zeynalov offers Nelly Fabrichnaya, accused by him, to drop the charges against her in exchange for transferring a large amount of money to him and reports that he agreed on this in the Baku City Republican Prosecutor's Office. Moreover, the prosecution claims that Fabrichnaya  secretly poisoned Zeynalov so that he die and  she take the money.

The trial is led by Judge Faik Ganiev.

The publication provoked a protest  of  the respected Irada Javadova, the lawyer of Afgan Zeynalov. At the second session, on October 3, she raised before the judge the issue of the Turan agency and the author of the article, which, in her opinion, deceive the society. She called Fabrichnaya's lawyer, Gazanfar Rzayev, to be the culprit, who uses the press to put pressure on the trial. The judge refused to listen to her arguments about the Turan agency, saying that he did not interfere in the affairs of the press, and Javadova could apply to the court and the Bar Association.

Commenting on this claim, lawyer Rzayev told Turan that he informs the public through the press, does not deceive the press, and did not sign a non-disclosure obligation.

Further, the court considered the presence and absence of witnesses to the transfer of money by Zeynalov to Fabrichnaya (here the opinions of the parties differ), Zeynalov's differing testimony about the transfer of keys and the code from the safe, installed by the boss for some reason not in the office, but in Fabrichnaya's apartment. On this point, the prosecution has one answer: Zeynalov trusted Fabrichnaya,  he was her father’s friend, and the money was Zeynalov's personal property.  The  lawyer Javadova  wrote the same in the 19th paragraph of her appeal to Turan.

However, this answer does not explain the reason why the owner of the company placed 700,000 manats in someone else's apartment, and not in a bank, for example, or in the house of his closest relatives, if he is really homeless. Moreover, Zeynalov then succeeded in placing the daughter of an old friend in a pre-trial detention center with the initiation of a case against her with the prospect of imprisonment for 10 years.

Also, lawyer Rzayev could not obtain information about the origin of the disputed amount of money from the head of the company. What remains is the statement made at the last court session by the head of the company that he found more than 700,000 manats (in dollars and manats) at a garbage dump.

On October 3, the hearing ended with a lengthy speech by the witness for the prosecution, an employee of the company, Fazil Hajiyev. He told how, on behalf of  Fabrichnaya, he bought medicines in pharmacies, the names of which he does not remember, and the packaging was not saved. Nelly allegedly secretly poisoned Zeynalov with these drugs.

But, as Rzayev's lawyer told Turan, the medicines were prescribed  by doctors  for Zeynalov, who was ill. The crisis in his health and the harm or benefit of medication may be a topic of discussion for medical professionals, not a court. Rzayev said that the prosecutor's office  rejected the version of secret poisoning of Zeynalov at the stage of investigation. However, Judge F. Ganiev listened to the speech of this witness for the prosecution, while he rejected several motions of the defense. And when the lawyer G. Rzayev insistently demanded satisfaction of his rights, the judge warned the defense counsel twice. Under the new law, judges can fine lawyers for making motions to drag out the trial.

Lawyer's claims against Turan agency

The lawyer for the prosecution, Irada Javadova, filed four-page claims against Turan. In the introductory part, she says that she does not intend to tell the press about the case, as the judicial investigation continues, but then she actually sets out the matter in 26 paragraphs.

In paragraphs 7-16, I. Javadova explains the legality and the reason for changing the preventive measure of the accused from house arrest to placement in a pre-trial detention center. N. Fabrichnaya used the possibilities of house arrest to put pressure on witnesses, and house arrest, as a rule, is applied in case of a charge that provides for punishment in the form of imprisonment for a term of less than two years, the lawyer writes.

In paragraph 18, Javadova protests because of the report in our article about the conviction of Zeynalov in 2015 for misappropriation of state funds and forgery of documents. The lawyer believes that the conviction in Lankaran is not relevant to the court in 2022.

On this point, Turan has its own opinion, which is that the fact of corruption and forgery of documents by the head of “Avtotransyol” Zeynalov, proven by the Lankaran Court for Serious Crimes (2015), casts doubt on the accusations of the head of “Murov”, the same Zeynalov in 2022. The second important topic for the press and the public in this process is that state funds are provided by the Railway Company CJSC “Dəmiryol” at the disposal of a businessman who was once convicted of corruption in the execution of another state company's order for laying roads in the south of our country. We draw the lawyer's attention to the fact that an article in the press differs from court protocols, and journalists do not write transcripts of court hearings, but report information that is important to society.

We will omit less significant points, the clarity of which will be given in the next meetings, and touch on 24 points in Javadova’s letter regarding the legal dispute about Zeynalov’s participation in the 2022 war, which is relevant for the Azerbaijani society. He draws the attention of the court to this circumstance, which in this case is really not relevant to the trial. Even in a statement sent to the Bar Association with a complaint against the defender Gazanfar Rzayev, a defender of Fabrichnaya, who allegedly insulted him in a drunken state in the presence of two investigators (!), Zeynalov separately indicates that he is a ghazi, that is, a participant in the 44-day war of 2020.

Since Zeynalov insists on his veteran status, Rzayev's lawyer presented the court with an official letter from the Ministry of Defense stating that Afgan Zeynalov was not a participant in the war. Turan reported this in a publication.

On October 3, Javadova presented to the court another letter from the Ministry of Defense, which says that Zeynalov helped the army, and this is fundamentally different from "participation in hostilities." In a letter to Turan, Javadova clarifies that they can provide the press with “any documents on the participation of the affected side in the war,” and “some information is a state secret.”

In paragraph 22, Javadova denies the accusation of the defendant, who claims that Zeynalov beat her. However, there is a letter signed by Nelli Fabrichnaya to the prosecutor's office of the Nasimi district, in which she, with facts and the names of witnesses, claims about the beatings by her former boss Afgan Zeynalov, demanding a second examination.

P.S. Turan

Concluding the article, we consider it right to inform the Baku Serious Crimes Court that if there are microphones in front of the participants in the  trials, they do not use them, so most of what is said in the hall is not heard by the spectators and journalists sitting far away. Sometimes the whole speech of the speaker is incomprehensible, and in fact it may contain fundamental for the  trial, key information. This may lead to inaccuracies in publications, which in no way indicate the subjectivity of the press. Courts must organize their work in such a way that every word spoken is heard and understood by everyone in the courtroom, otherwise the public importance of the press and legal proceedings is called into question.

Turan also calls on the Ministry of Justice to finally begin to fully implement the Decree of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan “On the creation of the “Electronic Court” information system dated February 13, 2014, especially regarding clause 2.6., which obliges the registration of trials using audio, video and other recording technical means and the creation of an opportunity to observe them online.

The "Electronic Court" system is designed to ensure transparency during the trial, ensure effective protection of human and civil rights and freedoms, and speed up the process of applying modern information technologies. But as practice shows, the President's order is sabotaged.--0--