XENOPHOBIA AND NATIONAL MINORITY RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN THE RUSSIAN-ANNEXED AUTONOMOUS REPUBLIC OF CRIMEA

The main problem in the ethnopolitical situation is the status of the Crimean Tatars. They are being discriminated against by the occupational government. The main efforts of the occupants over the course of the last year were aimed at oppressing the independent national Crimean Tatar movement.

The Crimean Tatar national leader, Ukrainian MP Mustafa Dzhemilev gave a thorough general account of the situation: “Over the course of the occupation, approximately 200 demeaning searches were conducted in the houses, schools, and mosques. Over two dozen people have been kidnapped and murdered. The property of hundreds of Muslim businesspeople has been taken away and ransacked, tens of thousands of Muslims have been forced to leave their homeland because of the banditism of the occupants and out of a fear for the lives of their children. Hundreds of people have been forced to go humiliating interrogations, have been given unfounded fines, some have been forcefully deported merely for openly speaking their minds about this occupation, which has been condemned by almost the entire world. There have been cases of cruel, inhumane torture of Muslims to force them to rat out their compatriots and fellow citizens.”¹⁰⁰.
Xenophobic Vandalism
● In early May, a memorial to Azerbaijani soldiers who had participated in the liberation of Sevastopol from the Fascists had been vandalized¹⁰¹.
● On May 23, vandals destroyed a memorial to the deported Crimean Tatars that stood near the foot of Eklizi Burun. After breaking off the tamga, the national symbol of the Crimean Tatars, the vandals threw the memorial piece off a cliff.

The Memorial to the Deported had been erected in 2014, before the anniversary of the Deportation of the Crimean Tatar People, by a public interest group using their own money¹⁰².

The stone was erected on May 18 to commemorate the life of a 17th century saint who had lived in that village and was famous for healing children. The place had been a site of pilgrimage. People had turned to the police after discovering the act of vandalism, but the police refused to opem criminal proceedings, citing the fact that the memorial had not been on the balance sheet of Schebetovka village.

The police proposed that the memorial could have just fallen by itself due to strong winds. According to data we have, the region had not had any recent strong winds at the time.¹⁰³.
● On October 21, unknown vandals in Koreiz poured yellow paint over a memorial plaque to the victims of the 1944 deportation.¹⁰⁴
● According to a report by the Spiritual Direction of the Muslims of Crimea (SDMC), unknown vandals broke into a mosque at the Zhigulina Roscha microdistrict near Simferopol on November 5 and trashed the premises. According to the SDMC PR Department, the door had apparently been opened by a crowbar. There were no valuables in the mosque, and nothing was taken save the alarm battery¹⁰⁵.
● On the night of November 13, unknown vandals broke two windows in the mosque of the Zavet-Leninskiy village of the Dzhankoy region. This was reported by the Chairman of the Dzhankoy Regional Mejlis Rustem Ennanov. According to Ennanov, the damage was first found by locals, who called the police on the next day, November 14¹⁰⁶.
● On December 10, it became known that the word “jackals” had been painted in large red letters on a sign showing the way to a memorial honoring Turkish soldiers who died in the Crimean war.¹⁰⁷. The sign is near the road to Sevastopol that goes through Mount Sapun.

As far as can be inferred, this was a way the vandals tried to show solidarity for the anti-Turkish campaign which the Russian media began as a response to the Turkish military bringing down a Russian military plane, which had been bombing Syria near the Syria-Turkey border on November 24, 2015, and which had violated Turkish airspace.

The vandals wrote in English: “God hates you,” “Leave, you bastards,” “I hate you,” and “You are born and die in lies”¹⁰⁸.

According to the Committee on Protection of the Rights of the Crimean Tatar People, 21 people have disappeared without trace since the occupation began.¹⁰⁹.

According to the Coordinator of the Crimean Contact Group for Human Rights, Abdureshit Jepparov, the officials in charge of the investigation spoke to Terekhov’s relatives and said that the young men decided to go to the Near East. However, Geniyev’s passport was left at his house. Human rights activists and relatives believe that they might have been kidnapped¹¹³.

Sinaver Kadyrov had been taken to the Armyansk City Court, which fined him for 2000 roubles¹¹⁵ and decided to deport him from territories deemed to be “Russian” by the occupants¹¹⁶.

As far as can be inferred, the grounds for arrest was the participation of the arrestees in Hizb ut-Tahrir, which is an Islamist organization that is banned in Russia but which had acted legally in Ukraine earlier. The relatives of the arrestees and their lawyer, however, deny that any evidence fo rthe arrestees taking part in a terrorist or otherwise illegal organization had been presented at the court session held to determine restrictions.¹¹⁸.

Experts of the leading Russian SOVA Center for Information and Analysis believe that accusing members of Hizb ut-Tahrir of propagating terrorism merely because of their actions as members of a political party (holding meetings, reading literature, and so on) and persecuting them as terrorists ¹¹⁹.
On January 26, members of the occupational law enforcement bodies held a search on the premises of the Crimean Tatar ATR TV channel.¹²⁰. According to ATR Director General on Information Policy, the goal of the search was to “confiscate any and all information about February 26 [2014 - V. L.], when a several-thousand-strong rally, many of whom were Crimean Tatars, was held near the Crimean Parliament” ¹²¹.
On January 29, staff of the of the occupational Main Investigations Directorate of the Republic of Crimea Investigation Committee detained Deputy Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People, Akhtem Chiygoz. He was being accused according to Article 212, Part 1 of the Russian Criminal Code (“organization of mass riots”) due to the events of February 26, 2014,¹²²

To recap, mass rallies in support and against Ukraine’s territorial involability took place on February 26, 2014. Pro-Ukrainian activists, first and foremost those on the side of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People, stopped pro-Russian activists, mostly belonging to the “Russian Unity” party, from taking over the Crimean Parliament building. Localized brawls happened several times during the mass protests.

After the annexation of Crimea, the Investigative Committee of Russia opened a criminal case for mass rioting and used the investigation as a pretense to begin persecuting the leaders and activists of the Crimean Tatar movement.

According to official representative of the Investigation Committee Vladimir Markin, the suspect had “provided an example with his own illegal behavior and induced the crowd to similar actions, which led to mass rioting accompanied by violence towards members of the ‘Russian Unity’ movement and the Crimean self-defense forces, as well as damage and destruction of property”¹²³.

On January 30, the court decreed to keep the suspect in confinement¹²⁴. On the same day, a search was held in Akhtem Chiygoz’s house¹²⁵.

On February 4, Aslan Chebiyev (b. 1957), who lives in Zavetnoye vilage of the Sovetsky district of Crimea, was arrested. He is being accused of participating in a rally in support of Ukraine’s territorial integrity, which took place on February 26, 2014.¹²⁶. Chebiyev was released after questioning¹²⁷.

FMS representatives stated that Dzhemilev’s travel ban had been put in place “to aid national defense capability and security, as well as for the purposes of upholding public peace.” At the same time, the representatives said that they had not initiated the travel ban. “We have no knowledge of the initiator’s person,” the FMS representatives said in their statement¹³⁰.

Ruslan Zeitullayev and two other Muslims were arrested by the Russian Federal Security Service at the end of January 2015. Criminal proceedings were opened against them according to Article 205.5 of the Russian Criminal Code (organizing activities for a terrorist organization and participation in such).¹³¹.

On March 23, Ilmi Umerov was brought in for questioning by investigators interested in how the rally of February 26, 2014, had been organized, and the activities of Akhtem Chiygoz¹³⁶, who is being accused by the occupants of organizing a pro-Ukrainian unity rally on February 26, 2014.

Asanov is being accused of participating in mass riots¹⁴⁶.

Workers of the occupational Center for the Counteraction of Extremism in the Crimea decided that the violation was “spreading information on extremist groups banned in the Russian Federation.” ¹⁴⁸.

According to SOVA center, the information about extremist groups banned in the Russian Federation was being spread by the agency not only before the Russian court made the appropriate decisions, but before Crimea was annexed by the Russian Federation, and thus cannot in any way fall under Russian jurisdiction¹⁴⁹.
On April 24, the First Deputy Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People, Nariman Dzhelyal, had been arrested at a Mejlis meeting. This was reported by Zair Smedlyayev, head of the Kurultai Central Election Committee, on Facebook. According to Smedlyayev, Dzhelyal had been taken to the Investigation Committee. Nariman Dzhelyay had already been questioned in March. His house had also been searched at the time. Smedylayev reported that the search and questioning had been connected to the “case of February 26.”¹⁵⁰.
On May 6, Deputy Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People Akhtem Chiygoz, held at the Simferopol detainment center, was moved to punitive confinement. This was reported by First Deputy Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People Nariman Dzhelyal on his Facebook page. Dzhelyal cited the wife of the arrestee, Elmira Ablyalimova.¹⁵¹. According to his lawyer, Chiygoz went on a hunger-strike. The penitentiary staff said that Chiygoz had been transferred to punitive confinement for violating the security regulations.

On May 7, the wife of Deputy Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People Akhtem Chiygoz planned to meet her husband; however, she was denied her conjugal visit. The detention facility staff said that Chiygoz had been placed in punitive confinement and so a meeting was impossible.¹⁵².

Chiygoz’s lawyer filed a statement to see the document on the basis of which Chiygoz had been transferred into punitive confinement.

On May 8 it became known that the arrestee had been moved to a regular cell and stopped the hunger strike¹⁵³.

Later the court extended the detention term, having denied the lawyers’ request of changing the restriction measures to recognizance not to leave town or to a personal surety being responsible for Chiygoz¹⁵⁴.

Akhtem Chiygoz was arrested on January 29. He was accused of organizing and participating in mass riots as part of the so-called “case of February 26.”

According to Eskender Bariyev, Head of the Committee for the Protection of Crimean Tatar Rights, the parents of the arrestee were told that this was part of the “case of Feburary 26.”

According to the owners of the cafe, “the Prosecutor’s Office and the courts of ‘New Crimea’ decided that our cafe’s work had been illegal“¹⁵⁶.

Natalia Poklonskaya, who calls herself the Prosecutor General of Crimea, noted that the case is being opened according to article 280.1 of the Russian Criminal Code (“Public appeals for the performance of actions intended to violate Russian Federation territorial integrity”).

According to Poklonskaya, Refat Chubarov will be on Russia’s wanted list once the investigation is underway¹⁵⁸.
On May 30, a hearing was hed on the claim made by Counsellor to the Mejlis Chairman Ismet Yuksel, who had attempted to protest an earlier decision by the Russian Federation Security Bureau to forbid him from entering Russian Federation territory.

The claimant and his representatives were given no information on the reasons for such a decision, as the case had been classified at the request of the Russian Federal Security Bureau. When the so-called “secret part of the case” was read aloud, Yuksel’s lawyer was removed from the court room by a representative of the Russian Federal Security Bureau.¹⁵⁹.

The defense appealed to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, insisting that the sentence needs to be lifted unconditionally and the criminal case needs to be closed¹⁶².

In May 2013, Khaiser Dzhemilev shot a rifle which he stole from his father out of a window and killed his 44-year-old acquaintance, Fevzi Edemov. By the time the Russian occupation began, the case had already been taken to court. The final court authority that had been examining the case had been the Court of Appeal in Kyiv, which had judged the homicide to have been committed out of negligence, and which had sentenced the defendant durante absentia to three years and eight months of prison. As one of the basic principles of law is that no one must be judged twice for the same crime, Ukraine demanded that Russia extradite Khaiser Dzhemilev.¹⁶³. A Russian trial of a Ukrainian citizen who had committed a crime in Ukrainian territory and who had already been sentenced according to Ukrainian laws in a Ukrainian court is a clear violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. On July 10, 2014, the European Court for Human Rights laid Russia under an obligation to free Dzhemilev Jr.

However, after the Crimean occupation took place, the Russian government returned the case to the Investigation Committee of the Republic of Crimea, and charged Khaiser Dzhemilev according to three articles of the Russian Criminal code, including “planned murder.” Russia ignored both Ukraine’s calls to extradite Khaiser Dzhemilev and the ECHR decision. In September 2014, Khaiser Dzhemilev had been sent by prisoner transport to Krasnodar Krai, where the trial began in April 2015.¹⁶⁴.

Many observers and human rights activists have expressed the notion that the blatantly extralegal behavior of Russia towards Mustafa Dzhemilev’s son is an attempt to influence the leader of the Crimean Tatar national movement. The family lawyer, Nikolai Polozov, called Khaiser Dzhemilev a hostage, who is being used “to put pressure on his father, Mustafa Dzhemilev, as the Russian investigation qualified his crime as a more severe one after Mustafa Dzhemilev had a conversation with Vladmir Putin”¹⁶⁵.
According to the Crimean Field Mission, on June 4 the 36-year-old Riza Izetov had been arrested by unknown armed persons wearing masks at the Stroganovka village of Simferopol Region. When asked who and by what right is holding the arrest, the unknown persons cited a court decision; however, they presented no documents to neither family nor friends. Izetov was taken to the Kyiv District Office of Internal Affairs (Simferopol city), where Izetov’s lawyer also was, to draw up a protocol, after which Izetov was released.¹⁶⁶.
On June 18, Lilya Budjura, an ATR journalist, announced on Facebook that cameraman Eskender Nabiyev, who had earlier been arrested as part of the “case of 26 February” investigations, was finally released¹⁶⁷ with Emirali Ablayev, the Mufti of Crimea, acting as surety.¹⁶⁸.

Eskander Nebiyev was detained on April 20. The court originally decreed to hold him in pre-trial confinement.

Even though there is no precise data, it is likely that criminal proceedings were opened according to Article 282 of the Russian Criminal Code (“Incitement of Hatred or Enmity”)¹⁷³.

The basis for the sentence was the imam’s critical attitude towards the Russian annexation of the peninsula. According to the investigation, the imam spoke to his three female co-workers (he is a mechanic at the Zheleznodorozhnoye village) on June 2014. In the conversation, he disagreed with their opinion on the Crimea being joined to Russia and stated that the Crimea will be returned to Ukraine, and then war will ensue. Yagyayev allegedly said that the Russians will be butchered and bemoaned the loss of life among his Muslim brothers in advance. The convicted man himself ardently denies having ever said that.

According to experts of the Russian SOVA center, “even if we assume that he really did make statements that could have been interpreted as threats (and this is something that we are doubtful of), they were not public. [...] Thus, his actions cannot be qualified according to Article 282 of the Criminal Code, which only applies to public statements.”¹⁷⁵.
On July 28, some notable activists of the Crimean Tatar movement were served summonses for questioning on the so-called “case of February 26.” The activists included Chairman of the Central Election Commission of the Kurultai of the Crimean Tatar People Zair Smedlyayev, First Deputy Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People Nariman Jelyal, and Mejlis Deputy Chairman Ilmi Umerov.

Umerov’s summons was scheduled for July 29, while Jelyal and Smedlyayev have been called to come in on August 1. The activists themselves believe that the summonses may be connected with the World Congress of Crimean Tatars, to be held at these same dates in Akara. They were not able to participate in the Congress due to being called in for questioning¹⁷⁶.

On July 28, the Kyiv District Court of the city of Simferopol extended the arrest of Akhtem Chigoyz, accused of organizing and participating in mass riots on February 26, 2014, to November 19. ¹⁷⁷
On August 1, on the first working day of the II World Congress of Crimean Tatars, which began in Istanbul, several notable representatives of the Crimean Tatars were summoned for questioning in Simferopol. These representatives included Chairman of the Central Election Commission of the Kurultai of the Crimean Tatar People Zair Smedlyayev, First Deputy Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People Nariman Jelyal, and Mejlis member Lemmar Yunusov.¹⁷⁸. The day before, Mejlis Deputy Chairman Ilmi Umerov was also called in for questioning to the Investigation Committee. On that same day, Mejlis member Enver Kurtiev was called in for questioning to the Russian Federation Investigation Committee in the Republic of Crimea by the means of a phone call, as he had already been on his way to the Congress.¹⁷⁹.

The activists of the Crimean Tatar movement believe that these timely summons were driven by the desire of the occupational government to prevent them from participating in the World Congress.

According to Ilmi Umerov, who recorded a video address to the Congress participants, the occupants “are trying to open new criminal cases.”¹⁸⁰.

On that same day, Mejlis Chairman Refat Chubarov stated at the World Congress of Crimean Tatars that the Crimean Tatars are forced to “live through a new version of genocide,” which is being executed by “that talented heir to the Soviet Union, Putin’s Russia.”¹⁸¹.

On the next day, August 2, the Congress called the global community to acknowledge that Russia’s actions aimed at destroying the Crimean Tatars, which have taken place from 1783 to the present time, constitute a genocide.¹⁸².
On August 3, coordinator of the Crimean Field Mission Olga Skrypnyk and analyst Vissarion Assev gave a press-conference dedicated to presenting the mission’s latest report, containing a multitude of facts about illegal detention, arrests, and torture of Crimean Tatars.

According to the human rights activists, “restriction of Crimean Tatar rights and pressure from law enforcement is becoming systematic. Activists, who have forsaken hope for any kind of justice, are being kidnapped, and videos from surveillance cameras disappear without a trace.”¹⁸³.

According to Aslanov’s relatives, he is being pressured to testify against Akhtem Chiygoz, who is being accused by the occupants of organizing mass riots on February 26, 2014.¹⁸⁵

Earlier, on June 4, 2014, Refat Chubarov had been banned from entry to the Russian Federation.

The court had already arrested the suspect earlier, on April 20¹⁸⁸, but on June 18 the suspect was released from detention¹⁸⁹ with Emirali Ablayev, the Mufti of Crimea, acting as surety.¹⁹⁰.

On October 11, Natalia Poklonskaya, who calls herself “prosecutor of Crimea,” issued a statement that Eskender Nebiyev has made a plea bargain based on working with the prosecutor’s office, has admitted his guilt, and is helping the investigation¹⁹¹. According to the verdict, Nebiyev has pleaded guilty to “acting in compliance with the orders of Akhtem Chiygoz, who organized the unsanctioned rally, has committed a socially grievous crime.” The socially grievous crime consisted of landing several blows on an unidentified person¹⁹².

On October 12, the Simferopol Central District Court conducted a hearing for the case under simplified proceedings and sentenced Eskender Nebiyev to 2 years and 6 months probation.¹⁹³.

It is likely that the plea bargain involved the defendant’s release from doing actual time in prison in exchange for evidence agains Deputy Chairman of the Meijlis of the Crimean Tatar People Akhtem Chiygoz, who is being accused of organizing riots. In essence, now the accusations against Chiygoz, who is currently undergoing investigation in a detention facility, have already been confirmed by this decision. However, Nebiyev’s lawyer has stated that his defendant has given no evidence against Chiygoz. According to the lawyer, Nebiyev merely confimed that he saw the Deputy Mejlis Chairman during the rally, but also stated that he had received no orders from Chiygoz and was not witness to Chiygoz giving any orders at all.¹⁹⁴.

It must be added here that the father of the accused, Bekir Nebiyev, had been accused by occupational law enforcement bodies of committing double homicide on September 26. The mutilated body of Bekir Nebiyev himself had been found in a tract of forest land near the Simferopol microdistrict “Fontany” on October 10. The investigators of the crime believe that Nebiyev Sr. committed suicide¹⁹⁵.

Ali Asanov has been under arrest since April 17.¹⁹⁹.

Lenur Islyamov is one of the initiators and organizators of the civil campaign to block goods from entering the occupied peninsula. As far as can be inferred, this campaign is the reason for the puppet regime in Crimea to pursue him. It also became known on that same day that criminal proceedings have been opened against Lenur Islyamov according to Article 280.1, p.2 of the Russian Criminal Code (“Public Calls for the Violation of the Territorial Integrity of the Russian Federation”)²⁰¹. Natalia Poklonskaya, who calls herself the Prosecutor General of Crimea, wrote on Facebook on that same day: “Legal action will follow against all of those who organized the so-called ‘blockade’ of Crimea, who acted against the rights and freedoms of our citizens, against the interests of our state and the republic of Crimea, who violated our current laws. Lenur Islyamov is not an exception! They will all be prosecuted to the full extent of the law!”²⁰²

The Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs has opened two criminal proceedings about the violation of citizen’s rights in Crimea, particularly concerning the searches in the homes of Lenur Islyamov and former ATR workers, as well as concerning obstruction of law-abiding activity of NGOs that speak against the occupation of Crimea. According to the ministry, data about these criminal cases has been filed in special databases.
On November 10, a court hearing took place to extend pre-trial restrictions for Ferit Seifullayev, Rustem Vaitov, Nuri Primov and Ruslan Zaitullayev. The court decided to extend their detention for two months, until January 22, 2016. They had been arrested in Sevastopol in January and are being accused of terrorism. As far as can be incurred, the accusation is based on their participation in the Hizb ut-Tahrir movement, which is banned in Russia.

According to Nuriman Memedinov’s Facebook post, activists who had come to the trial to support the detained were given summonses for questioning to the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB). Everyone who had entered and exited the court building had been filmed²⁰³.

According to Budzhurova, the reason for her taking legal action was that they did not allow her lawyer to be present during the search. Budzhurova believes that this is a violation of her constitutional right to a lawyer. According to the Crimean journalist, FSB staff deny that any violations had taken place The first hearing took place on November 16, in the Kyiv Distric Court of Simferopol²⁰⁴.

Akhtem Chiygoz was arrested on January 29, 2015 in an ongoing criminal investigation about the organization of mass riots near the Parliament of Crimea, which took place on February 26, 2014. Since then, the term of his arrest has been extended several times²⁰⁵.

The court also extended the term of arrest for two more persons of interest for the “February 26 case,” Ali Asanov and Mustafa Degermendzhi, for three more months (until February 19, 2016)²⁰⁶. The court’s reasoning for the decision was that the accused “may abscond during the investigation and put pressure on the witnesses”²⁰⁷.
On November 25, occupational law enforcement staff visited the home of the parents of Mejlis member Eskander Bariyev. His sisters were called in for questioning by the FSB²⁰⁸.
On November 25, the Kyiv District Court of Simferopol granted the investigator’s request to impose a time limit on the familiarization of the defendant in the “case of February 26,” Deputy Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People Akhtem Chiygoz and his lawyers with the materials of the case. They were given until December 4 to do so²⁰⁹. Notably, the case materials comprise 24 volumes and 47 gigabytes of video recordings. According to the defense, one gigabyte is about four hours of viewing time.
On November 30, FSB workers conducted a search in the home of the Chairman of the Kirov Regional Mejlis Ekrem Abdulvatov. According to them, the search was connected to open criminal proceedings concerning the explosion at the electricity transmission tower that had been powering the peninsula. Nothing was confiscated as a result of the two-hour search.

A search was also conducted at the home of Acting Chairman of the Sovietsky Regional Mejlis Rustem Mennanov²¹⁰.

According to the investigation, Akhtem Chiygoz organized and Ali Asanov and Mustafa Degermendzhi participated in mass riots that took place on February 26, 2014, near the Crimean Parliament. The riots grew out of the rally of supporters of Ukraine’s territorial integrity, which numbered in the thousands, and their opponents from the “Russian Unity” party, led by the current head of Crimea, Sergey Aksenov.²¹¹.

On December 10, another suspect in the “May 3 case,” the 53-year-old Tair Smedlyayev, was sentenced to two years of probation²¹⁴.

Both of the accused were found guilty according to Article 318, P. 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (“Use of Violence Against a Representative of the Power”). The defense insisted that the “injured party” in the confrontation were not representatives of the authorities. They were former members of the Ukrainian special police department “Berkut,” and even though they were in-uniform, at that time they were not employed by law enforcement in any country. “Berkut” had been disbanded in February 2014, and the former Ukrainian policemen had only been hired by Russians at the end of May.

To recap the incident in question: on May 3, 2014, many activists of the Independent Crimean Tatar Movement went to the administrative border between the Autonomous Republic of Crimea to greet their national leader, Mustafa Dzhemilev, who was forbidden entry to the peninsula by the occupational government. The meeting turned into a protest rally, during which, according to the occupants, the activists disturbed public order and violently broke through the police line. Three activists had already been sentenced for the “May 3” case, and approximately 100 people were fined sums from 10 to 40 thousand roubles.

According to lawyer Dzhemil Temishev, the search in Islyamova’s home was part of the criminal investigation against Lenur Islyamov, ATR owner and one of those who organized the civil campaign to block off Crimea.²¹⁶.

On December 10, a search was also held at the house of QaraDeniz production studio editor Roman Spiridonov, as well as at the home of his parents. The searches seem to have been part of the same case²¹⁷.
On December 16, the 24-year-old Invir Krosh, a Crimean Tatar who had been lured into the local police department under false pretenses, had Federal Security Service representatives attempt to force him into cooperation. The occupants threatened Krosh’s children with bodily harm and death. They also tortured him by electric shock.²¹⁸.
On December 22, a search had been held in the house of the parents of Father Sergiy, a Ukrainian priest of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Kyiv Patriarchy), who himself currently resides in mainland Ukraine. Four notebooks with private notes had been confiscated in the search, which was sanctioned by Natalia Poklonskaya, who calls herself “Prosecutor General of Crimea.” Criminal proceedings have been opened against the priest for “participating in an extremist organization.” As far as it is known, the priest was a former member of the People’s Movement of Ukraine, which had not been classified as an extremist organization in the Russian Federation²¹⁹.

On December 23, the next day after the search, the mother of the suspect was taken for questioning as a witness to the Zheleznodorozhnoye police department. Her fingerprints had also been taken²²⁰.

Earlier, the Kyiv District court (Simferopol city) restricted the term of familiarization with materials of the case to ten days. Notably, the case materials comprise 24 volumes and 47 gigabytes of video recordings. According to the defense, one gigabyte is about four hours of viewing time. The accused only had time to familiarize himself with 10 volumes over the time given by the court of original jurisdiction.

During the hearing, Chiygoz’s attorney, Aleksandr Lesovoi, requested to stop criminal proceedings as the events happened in Ukraine and thus cannot be investigated by Russian law enforcement bodies, but the judges dismissed the motion. The court also dismissed the appeal made by the defense of Degermedzhi and Asanov about changing the pre-trial restraints from detention to house arrest or a written pledge not to leave town²²².

The court sustained the motion to allow public defenders to work on the case (in Russian law, public defenders are additional participants who participate in the legal process on par with the defendant’s attorney; if the court allows, a close relative may fill the function instead of a legally-trained professional. -transl.). For Chiygoz, the public defender will be his wife, Elmira Ablyalimova. For Mustafa Degermendzhi and Eskender Emirvaliyev, the defenders will be their mothers.²²³.

On that same day, December 28, judgement was passed in the Central District Court of Simferopol on one more suspect in the “case of February 26,” Talyat Yunusov. The defendant was found guilty of participation in mass riots and was sentenced to 3,5 years of probation²²⁴.

To recap: the after te occupation, the puppet regime opened criminal proceedings according to Article 212 (“Mass Riots Accompanied by Violence”) of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The pretext for the case were the confrontations on February 26, 2014. Only Crimean Tatars were accused in these criminal proceedings. Akhtem Chiygoz is being accused according to Article 212, Part 1 (“Organization of Mass Riots”), and all the other defendants are being accused according to Part 2 of the same article.

According to the so-called “Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Crimea” it was “found that [...] the unlawful actions of the organizator and participants of the mass riots led to the deathsof two people, and to 79 people sustaining various injuries”²²⁵.

Earlier, on October 12, the Central District Court of Simferopol already passed a sentence on another of the suspects in the February 26 case, Eskender Nebiyev. See the October issue of our bulletin for details.

It can be assumed that the sentences already passed on the “case of February 26” are necessary so that the “guilt” of the “riot” “organizator” Akhtem Chiygoz, whose case is only now just being opened, would have been long “proved” by prior sentences.

The Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs published an official comment “in connection to the beginning of the so-called ‘trial’ of the participants of the peaceful rally in Simferopol that took place on February 26, 2014, and that is now being conducted by the Russian occupational government.” The statement reads: “the lynching of those who protected their homeland from the Russian aggressor by the occupational government [...] is a cynical challenge of international law issued to the global community.” “The policy of persecution of Crimean Tatars enacted by the Russian occupational government, cases of violence and cruel treatment, facts of forced deportation, restriction of the right to freedom of religion, destruction of community organizations and the persecution of media outlets and journalists have turned Crimea into an island of fear and suffering for its indigenous people.” The Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs demanded that the Russian side “stop persecuting Crimean Tatars in the temporarily occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea and immediately free illegally detained suspects of the February 26 case”²²⁶.
On December 28, approximately twenty-five participants of illegal paramilitary groups (so-called “Crimean Cossacks”) led by “ataman” [chieftain -transl.] Yakovlev and his deputy, Rokhman, raided Crimean Tatar homest in the Dolinka village of the Krasnoperekopsk region in the Crimea. According to the Chairman of the Krasnoperekopsk Regional Mejlis Sanya Ametova, the Cossacks’ raid took place because some of the local villages, included Dolinka, had bus stops with Ukrainian government symbols and the crosswalks were painted blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine²²⁷.

According to the Dolinka imam Yunus Nemetullayev, the people who came under fire were mostly those who had been seen at the solemn commemoration of the 71st anniversary of the deportation of Crimean Tatars, which took place on May 18 at the Voinka village, near a memorial plaque for the deported. The cossacks and the police took photographs of all participants to confirm their identity later. “They were all registered at the local police office. The raid was focusing on the activists. They did not visit anyone who had not participated,” the imam said²²⁸.