Advance unedited version CCPR/C/133/D/2850/2016
the District Court repealed the decision of the prosecutor’s office of 13 January 2012 and
ordered the Issyk-Atynsk district prosecutor’s office to conduct further investigation. On 16
June 2012, the Issyk-Atynsk district prosecutor’s office refused to open a criminal
investigation. The prosecutor questioned 7 detainees involved in the incident of 14 September
2011. All of them either stated that they did not have any claims or refused to provide
explanations. One of them retracted his complaint. The author submitted an appeal to the
Chuysky regional prosecutor’s office claiming that the prosecutor failed to question the
monitoring group who interviewed the detained persons.
2.6
On 13 September 2012, the Chuysky regional prosecutor’s office repealed the IssykAtynsk district prosecutor’s office decision of 16 June 2012 not to open a criminal
investigation. The regional office noted, in particular, that persons detained in other cells,
specifically female detainees, had not been questioned.
2.7
On 25 September 2012, having questioned two female detainees, a prosecutor of
Issyk-Atynsk district prosecutor’s office refused to open a criminal investigation. One of the
female detainees confirmed having seen the officers opening all the cells except the one with
women, taking the detainees to the courtyard and beating them with police batons and
wooden sticks. Another female detainee declared having seen no beatings but having heard
the arguments and shouting and seen detainees being escorted next to her cell. On 16 October
2012, the author filed a motion with the Issyk-Atynsk district prosecutor to question all the
witnesses (men and women) detained on 14 September 2011 in the same facility with the
author, as well as a human rights defender Ms. A., a member of the monitoring group who
personally interviewed the author. The author’s motion was rejected on the ground that all
the witnesses had been questioned.
2.8
On 22 April 2013, the author appealed the refusal of 25 September 2012 of the district
prosecutor to the Chuysky regional prosecutor’s office. On 13 May 2013, the regional
prosecutor’s office repealed the decision in question. On 27 May 2013, yet another decision
not to open criminal investigation has been made by the Issyk-Atynsk district prosecutor’s
office. The decision mentions that the author, who by then was serving a sentence in
correctional facility No.3, refused to give testimony on the matter, which was duly
documented.
2.9
On 21 October 2013, the author appealed the decision of 27 May 2013 to the IssykAtynsk District Court. He claimed that the decision is unlawful and groundless. He claimed
that the prosecutor’s argument that the police had used force in line to Instruction No. 263 to
prevent escape of detainees is wrong, since no one can confirm the fact that the author and
other detained persons attempted an escape. Even if they did try to escape, they were unarmed
and there was no reason to use excessive force against them. The argument of the prosecutor
that the injuries sustained by the author were light and of no harm to his health only confirms
that he sustained beating. The level of injuries is of no importance. The human rights defender
Ms. A. had not been questioned although she has seen the injuries of the detainees after their
beatings.
2.10 The District Court rejected the author’s appeal on 25 November 2013. The Court
relied on the fact that several of the detainees retracted their complaints. It concluded that the
investigation was carried out fully and according to the law. The author is not mentioned
directly in the court decision.
2.11 On 18 December 2013, the author appealed to the Chuysky Regional Court. His
appeal was rejected on 13 February 2014. The author submitted a supervisory review appeal
to the Supreme Court but his appeal was rejected on 23 April 2014.
2.12 The author claims that conditions of detention in pre-trial detention facilities in
Kyrgyzstan are inadequate. In support, he refers to the 2011 monitoring report carried out in
47 places of deprivation of liberty.4, 5
4
5
Report on the results of implementation of the project “Eliminating torture in Kyrgyzstan with the
help of national human rights mechanisms”, 2011 (Противодействие пыткам в Кыргызстане с
помощью национальных механизмов защиты прав человека).
The author does not provide any details about conditions of detention he personally experienced.
3