(HRW/IFEX) – On 22 September 1998, Human Rights Watch-Moscow reported the start of the trial against Aleksandr Nikitin, writer, environmental activist and retired naval officer who is facing Russian Federation Security Bureau (FSB) inspired treason charges for his work for the Norwegian environmental organization Bellona Foundation on the dangers of nuclear contamination caused by Russia’s […]
(HRW/IFEX) – On 22 September 1998, Human Rights Watch-Moscow reported the
start of the trial against Aleksandr Nikitin, writer, environmental activist
and retired naval officer who is facing Russian Federation Security Bureau
(FSB) inspired treason charges for his work for the Norwegian environmental
organization Bellona Foundation on the dangers of nuclear contamination
caused by Russia’s Northern Fleet. (He wrote a draft report for Bellona.)
The trial will start on 20 October 1998 at the St. Petersburg City Court.
The presiding judge will be Sergei Golets. On 24 September at 11:00 am
(local time), Nikitin’s lawyer, Yury Schmidt, will hold a press conference
in St. Petersburg, Nevsky Prospekt 70, Dom Zhurnalistov.
**Updates IFEX alerts of 17 and 1 December 1997, and 19 June 1996**
Following is the full text of a Human Rights Watch letter to President
Yeltsin and Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov expressing concern about the
fact that the FSB can influence the selection of two out of the three judges
hearing the Nikitin case:
On behalf of Human Rights Watch, the largest non-governmental human rights
organization based in the United States, I extend my greetings.
I am writing to you regarding the case of environmental activist Aleksandr
Nikitin, who will face high treason charges in the St. Petersburg City Court
this fall. If convicted, Nikitin faces a maximum twenty-year prison
sentence. Human Rights Watch is deeply concerned that a clear conflict of
interest will serve to deny Mr. Nikitin’s right to a fair trial; the Federal
Security Service (FSB), the very agency that brought the charges, can now
essentially select two-thirds of the panel that will try Mr. Nikitin.
In June 1998, Mr. Nikitin requested the Supreme Court to consider his case
in first instance, as he believed he would be more likely to receive a fair
trial in Russia’s highest court. However, the Supreme Court ruled against
accommodating the request, holding that this would strip Mr. Nikitin of his
right to appeal. The Supreme Court further maintained it had no reason to
believe the St. Petersburg City Court could not give Mr. Nikitin a fair
trial.
When the criminal investigation was finalized, the FSB asked Mr. Nikitin
whether he preferred his case to be heard by a panel of three professional
judges or of one professional judge and two lay assessors. Mr. Nikitin
requested the former. In accordance with article 15 of Russia’s criminal
procedure code, cases that involve a maximum punishment of more than fifteen
years’ imprisonment or the death penalty must be heard by three professional
judges. However, the St. Petersburg City Court appointed one professional
judge to preside over the trial, pursuant to a decision of the Russian
parliament to temporarily suspend article 15 due to a lack of professional
judges. The two lay assessors have not yet been appointed.
Under article 21 of the Law on State Secrets, citizens and officials in
Russia can gain access to state secrets only after undergoing a security
clearance by the FSB. Article 21 makes an exception for, among others,
judges, procurators and lawyers participating in cases relating to state
secrets. Because lay assessors are not listed among the officials who enjoy
this exemption, they presumably need FSB security clearance before hearing a
case related to state secrets. Although in legal practice, the professional
judge’s assessment generally has more weight than those of the lay
assessors, according to Russian law, the voices of the judge and the lay
assessors have equal weight.
Participation of lay assessors in court hearings is general practice in
Russia’s lower courts, and every court has a list of potential lay
assessors. Formally, the secretary of the presiding judge picks the lay
assessors at random. As far as Human Rights Watch is aware, the FSB vets
these lay assessors only after they have been selected for a trial related
to state secrets. Human Rights Watch appreciates the necessity of such a
procedure to protect classified information. However, when the FSB
influences the selection of lay assessors in relation to a specific trial,
the impartiality of the selection process is questionable. The FSB’s prior
conduct in the Nikitin case gives us reason to fear that its grounds for
rejecting lay assessors would extend beyond pure security concerns.
Taken together, these circumstances essentially enable the FSB to hand-pick
the two lay assessors who will hear the Nikitin case, and who, strictly
interpreting the law, could form the majority voice in the case. This
blatant conflict of interests favoring the prosecution is unlikely to
produce an impartial panel capable of ensuring Mr. Nikitin a fair trial.
We therefore ask you to take all possible measures to ensure that Mr.
Nikitin will face a fair trial.
We look forward to your reply,
Respectfully yours,
Holly Cartner
Executive Director
Human Rights Watch
Europe and Central Asia division
Similar letters can be sent to:
Appeals To
Boris Yeltsin
President
Moscow, Russia
Fax: +7 095 206 5173/206 6277
Email: care of Marat Guriev, Administration of President Yeltsin,
marat@gurien.nirros.msk.ruPrime Minister Yevgeny Primakov
Moscow, RussiaVyacheslav Lebedev
President of the Supreme Court
Moscow, Russia
