Analytical review of the trial on the criminal case of Artyom Breus and Ivan Gaponov. Day 2.

1 March 2011 the trial of the citizens of the Russian Federation Artyom Breus and Ivan Gaponov started at the Maskouski District Court of Minsk.

10 a.m. – after the beginning of the trial, prosecutor Siarhei Kunas, representative of the state accusation, read new charges, according to which A.Breus and I.Gaponov had taken part in the mass riot which had been accompanied with seizure of buildings, pogroms and armed resistance to the police. The crowd made repeated attempts to break the police cordon with the aim to get into the House of the Government. In the meantime they used iron bars, ice axes, an axe and bottles with incendiary mix delivered there by other persons. The actions of the crowd resulted in inflicting injuries to policemen and damaging property worth 14 million rubles.

Ivan Gaponov - on grounds of the mass riot under Article 293, part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus, having joined a crowd, other participants of which used bottles with incendiary mix, iron bars, etc., made repeated attempts to break the police cordon with the aim to penetrate the House of the Government, committed violent actions towards police officers and delivered blows on their baffles, which resulted in destruction of property and infliction of bodily injuries of different degrees of severity (from light ones, which didn’t entail short-term health disorder, to beating and ‘feeling of physical pain’) to 15 police officers: Bulavatski, Bozkha, Davydovich, Filipenka, Karavayeu, Kashtalan, Komar, Kudrautsou, Lavitski, Masalski, Palavinkin, Sapach, Skarakhod, Volkau and Ziankevich.

Artyom Breus – on grounds of the mass riot under Article 293, part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus acted in the crowd at about 10.30 p.m., repeatedly trying to break the police cordon and penetrate the House of the Government. Other participants were using bottles with incendiary mix, bars, etc. in the meantime. Breus delivered blows on the policemen’s feet and baffles. Such actions resulted in destruction of property and infliction of bodily injuries of different degrees of severity (from light ones, which didn’t entail short-term health disorder, to beating and ‘feeling of physical pain’) to 15 police officers: Bulavatski, Bozkha, Davydovich, Filipenka, Karavayeu, Kashtalan, Komar, Kudrautsou, Lavitski, Masalski, Palavinkin, Sapach, Skarakhod, Volkau and Ziankevich.

10.15 – copies of the rulings about new accusations were presented to participants of the trial – the accused and their defense.

10.20 – Judge Liubou Siamakhina asked them whether they needed extra time for familiarizing with the charges and preparing to the further court hearings. I.Gaponov, A.Breus and their attorneys stated they needed to be given such time.

Prosecutor Siarhei Kunas solicited for attaching to the case the rulings about recognizing police officers Bulavatski, Bozkha, Davydovich, Filipenka, Karavayeu, Kashtalan, Komar, Kudrautsou, Lavitski, Masalski, Palavinkin, Sapach, Skarakhod, Volkau and Ziankevich victims, the minutes of their interrogations in the course of the preliminary investigation, the rulings for appointment of expertise and the results of each expertise.

The court granted the motion.

10.25 – Lawyers Alena Kazak and Liudmila Siarheyeva solicited for changing the restraint to their defendants to written non-leave undertakings. They motivated the motion by stating that A.Breus and I.Gaponov hadn’t been drawn to criminal responsibility before, the material damage had been compensated and the both of them had permanent residence on the territory of Belarus.

The representative of the state accusation didn’t uphold this motion and stated that according to the Criminal Process Code the restraint in the form of detention could be chosen just because of the gravity of the crime. As far as violation of Article 293 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus is a grave crime, the prosecutor believes that the restraint must remain the same.

The judge announced a 10-minute break and left the court hall.

10.35 – the judge declined the motions of the defense and left the restraint unchanged. She announced a break in the trial till 10 March so that the accused and their defense could familiarize with the new charges and prepare to the following court hearings.

Conclusions:

1. the procuracy filed the accusation that has no significant differences from the previous one.
2. 15 injured police officers appeared in the case. Meanwhile, the same surnames were put in the accusations to A.Breus, I.Gaponov, as well as in the new accusation to Dzmitry Miadzvedz, whose trial started at the Maskouski District Court of Minsk on 1 March.
3. the previous court sittings eloquently demonstrated that the investigation had no evidence to back the charges presented to A.Breus and I.Gaponov.
4. in such circumstances the Human Rights Center Viasna insists on the release of A.Breus and I.Gaponov and their complete justification.