CCPR/C/119/D/2842/2016
Factual background
2.1
On 12 February 2009, I. was detained by the police as a car theft suspect. He was
kept at the Almalinsk district department of internal affairs in Almaty for two days, and
claims to have been tortured there. After being threatened with the potential arrest of his
brother, I. gave a confession, allegedly in the absence of a lawyer. I. was held in pretrial
detention on the basis of court decisions of 15 February, 10 April and 15 May 2009. On 5
October 2009, Almaty City Court sentenced I. under article 178 (3) of the Criminal Code
(robbery of a large amount, committed by an organized group) to eight years in prison. The
author appealed, as a legal representative of his son, to the Supreme Court, on 26 October
2009. On 21 April 2010 the Supreme Court reduced the sentence to a six-year prison term,
on the basis of new legislation. The author’s appeal under the supervisory review
proceedings, to the Chair of the Supreme Court, dated 13 June 2011, was rejected by that
court on 1 August 2011. The author claims that the investigation was carried out with
procedural violations, that the video recording of his son’s interrogation was tampered with
by the prosecutors to remove the parts where he might have been subjected to pressure, and
that the principal witness testimonies were not taken into account, among other things. He
claims that the ex officio lawyer who represented his son at this stage signed the transcript
of his questioning as a suspect and of his confession without having been present during the
questioning. The author was not informed about his right to hire a lawyer of his choice. He
also claims that the trial was unfair, in particular because he and his son did not receive the
closing indictment and did not have time to familiarize themselves with the case file. The
court took into account all the unlawful evidence and based the verdict solely on I.’s
confession given under duress. I. was not present at the appeal hearing.
2.2
I. served his sentence in correction colony LA/155-13 and was released on 11
February 2015. The author claims that his son was held in inhuman conditions in the colony,
mainly due to the lack of necessary medical assistance for his numerous diseases which
included tuberculosis. The author claims that the State should have provided I. with housing
and a means of existence after his release from prison, and claims that currently his son is
suffering from several diseases contracted in prison and acquired after being tortured by the
police. He also submits that without registration at a particular address, his son could not
vote in the elections. On 3 April 2012, I. requested early release, which was refused by a
court on 10 April 2012. On 3 September 2013, he requested that his sentence be reduced
from six to five years. That request was rejected by a court on 10 October 2013.
2.3
On 13 February 2009, the police searched the author’s apartment in connection with
their suspicions of I. The author claims that the police had the wrong search warrant, that
they hit him and that they caused his son E. to have a heart attack. The author also submits
that, after the search, E. was taken for questioning to the police detention facility, where his
brother I. was being held, and was kept there until 7.30 p.m.
2.4
On 10 February 2016, I. was detained by police for one and a half hours in
connection with a theft allegedly committed by acquaintances of his. He was ill-treated in
the detention facility. On 11 February 2016, I. submitted a complaint to the prosecutor’s
office in Almaty in this regard.
The complaint
3.1 The author claims that the rights of I. under articles 2 (1) and (3) (a, b, c); 7; 8 (3) (a);
9 (1-5); 10 (1), (2) (a) and (3); 14 (1-3 (a-g), (5) and (6); 15 (1) and (2); 17 (1) and (2), 25
(b) and 26 of the Covenant were violated, in particular due to torture by the police, lack of
effective investigations thereof, irregularities in the pretrial investigation, unlawful
detention and lack of a fair trial.
3.2
He also claims a violation of his own rights and the rights of his son E. under articles
2 (1) and (3) (a, b, c); 7; 9 (1), (2), (4) and (5); 10 (1); 14 (1) and (5); 15 (2); 17 (1) and (2);
and 26 of the Covenant, among others, due to the unlawful police search, the lack of an
effective investigation into the author’s respective complaints, and the unlawful keeping of
E. in the police detention facility.
2