CCPR/C/116/D/2078/2011
3.4
The author claims that during his arrest his apartment was searched, unlawfully,
without official authorization. Furthermore, his correspondence was opened and was
censored, in violation of article 17 (1) of the Covenant.
3.5
The author requests the Committee to find violations of the above-mentioned articles
of the Covenant, to request the State party to discontinue the fabricated criminal
proceedings against him, to release him and to direct the State party to provide him with
appropriate compensation for his unlawful arrest and detention.
State party’s observations on admissibility and the merits3
4.1
In a communication dated 11 June 2012, the State party submitted its observations
on the merits of the case. It explains that Mr. Amanklychev was sentenced to seven years of
imprisonment after having been found guilty of violating article 287 of the Criminal Code
of Turkmenistan.
4.2
In a communicated dated 24 September 2012, the State party, responding to the
Committee’s request for copies of the court documents, explained that in accordance with
article 433 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Turkmenistan, a copy of the verdict is
provided to the convicted person no later than five days after it has been announced. Copies
of Mr. Amanklychev’s verdict and sentence are “legal and [have] been handed to the
convicted person”.
4.3
Challenging the admissibility of the communication, the State party submits that the
author has not asked the prosecutors to review his case.
4.4
In a communication dated 18 March 2013, the State party stated that in accordance
with clemency proclaimed by the President of Turkmenistan on 15 February 2013, Mr.
Amanklychev was released from serving the remainder of his sentence. The State party
further asserts that while serving his sentence in a correctional facility in Akdash settlement
in the Balkan region, the author was provided with adequate food and clean water and a
daily walk in the fresh air, and that housing, medicine and other conditions in the facility
met the international standards.
Author’s comments on the State party’s observations
5.1
In communications dated 6 July 2012 and 12 December 2013, the author submits
that the State party purposely avoided answering the substantive issues raised in the original
communication. He further claims that the law enforcement agencies did not have any
evidence of his guilt and that he was imprisoned unlawfully.
5.2
The author submits that although he was first accused of espionage, he did not
provide any secret information to foreign journalists. There was no evidence against the
author other than the bullets that were planted in his car by the police.
5.3
The State party has not explained why the author’s family and friends were denied
access to the author while he was in prison, nor why he was denied parcels of food and
correspondence from his family. His release on 15 February 2013 was just three months
before the end of his sentence.
3
4
On 25 July 2012, 5 February 2013 and 6 November 2013, the State party was requested to provide the
Committee with copies of relevant decisions pertaining to the author’s case. The Committee did not
receive these documents.