| 00.00.03 |
The decision of the
investigator Chumachenko, issued on January, 20 2003 on
the case #110351 regarding obscure disappearance of Mr.
Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij, in which we are identified as
victims, suspended the investigation of the case because
no person who could be brought to criminal responsibility
was found.
We consider this decision to be unfounded, unlawful and
subject to repeal.
1. It is claimed in the
decision that during the investigation of the case "different
versions of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij were examined
and worked through: version, connected with business activities
of Mr. Krasovskij; version, connected with political and
business activities of Mr. Gonchar; version, connected with
their disappearance being feigned; version, connected with
an attempt to steal a prestigious jeep "Cherokee".
A version, voiced by the media about participation of Mr.
Pavlichenko — commander of the military unit #3214, in Mr.
Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij disappearance." But it is
not indicated in the decision whether these versions are
somehow proved (even partly) or not.
From the analysis of this
document follows that the investigation was successful when
working on the version connected with the politically motivated
violent disappearance of Mr. Gonchar — member of the Belarusian
Parliament, Chairperson of the Parliament, leader of the
oppositional to the President of the Republic of Belarus
forces.
2. Materials of investigation
make obvious participation in the crime certain state officials
of the Republic of Belarus.It
is important to point out that some documents, which where
published by the independent media where recognized by the
investigators as reliable and related to the present criminal
case. The facts and events, which are proved by these documents
according to the rules of the Criminal Procedure Code of
the Republic of Belarus, have to be evaluated together with
other evidences found out by the investigators. Among these
documents there are: report of Mr. Lapatik from November,
11 2000; report of Mr. Alkajev, November, 23 2000; record
of the interrogation of Mr. Alkajev as a witness from November,
24 2000, which was held by the deputy of a prosecutor’s
office chief Mr. Kazakov; record of the taking out of the
pistol and the registration book (of the arms and ammunition
giving out and receiving to the personnel of the investigator’s
isolation ward) from November, 24 2000 with the records
from May, 5 1993; the record of the examination of this
book; decision regarding the assignment of the criminality
expert’s examination of the pistol "PB-9"” # PO57C
from November, 27 2000, which was issued by the chief of
the operative investigation group Mr. Branchel; expert’s
conclusion # 184 from November, 27 2000 on the case # 414100;
receipt of the Cannel Alkajev, Ministry of the Internal
Affairs armed forces from November, 28 2000 proving the
fact that he got the pistol "PB-9" # PO57C in
the holster with an extra magazine and muffler and the arms
registration book from Mr. Branchel.
From the report of the
Minister of the Internal Affairs Deputy, the chief of the
Criminal police Mr. Lapatik to the Minister of the Internal
Affairs Mr. Naumov from November, 21 2000 is obvious that
Mr. Lapatik knew that in April 1999 Mr. Sheiman (Secretary
of the Security Council of the Republic of Belarus) gave
to the Minister of the Internal Affairs Mr. Sivakov instructions
to let the commander of Special Unit of Quick Reaction Pavlichenko
(military unit #3214) see in the investigator’s isolation
ward #1 of the Minsk region executive committee department
of the Internal affairs the execution by shooting of a sentenced
person and the burial procedure. This assignment Mr. Sivakov
gave to the chief of the investigator’s isolation ward #1
Alkajev and Mr. Pavlichenko was let to see the procedure.
In the report it is said
also that Mr. Sheiman gave Mr. Pavlichenko instructions
to physically eliminate former Minister of Internal Affairs
Mr. Zakharenko. A special department, with Mr. Vasilchenko
at the head (Presidential Security Service), was in charge
for the information support regarding location of Mr. Zakharenko.
"Capture and subsequent elimination of Mr. Zakharenko
was carried out by a group of military men from special
armed forces with Mr. Pavlichenko at the head. Using similar
scheme Pavlichenko and his group carried out capture and
elimination of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij," — is
indicated in the report. It is written in the report that
the place of Mr. Zakharenko, Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij
burial is a special burial area in the North cemetery, Minsk.
The circumstances, which
are laid down in the report of Mr. Lapatik, are confirmed
by the information from the report from November 23, 2000
of the chief of the investigator’s isolation ward #1 Alkajev
to the Minister of the Internal Affairs Naumov, as well
as from the record of the interrogation of Mr. Alkajev as
a witness in the case #414100 from November, 24 2000. In
these documents Mr. Alkajev testifies that at the request
of the former Minister of Internal Affairs Sivakov he indeed
let Mr. Pavlichenko (commander of Special Unit of Quick
Reaction, military unit #3214) see the execution by shooting,
and two times (April, 4 1999 and September, 16 1999) gave
through Mr. Dik and Mr. Kolesnik to Mr. Sivakov the pistol
"PB-9" # PO57C with a muffler, which was used
to carry out this execution.
In the appealed decision
it is stated "with large extent of probability"
that in the night of September, 17 1999 Mr. Gonchar and
Mr. Krasovskij "were kidnapped with the use of violence
by persons, not identified by the investigation, and taken
away in an unknown direction". This happened near building
in Fabrichnaja Street.
The information, which
the decision of the investigator Chumachenko contains, gives
the possibility to consider the following fact proved and
established: kidnapping of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij
was carried out by a group of people (not less than 6),
who were using a red "BMW" and probably an "Audi".
Additional forces, who watched the territories near the
public bath in Fabrichnaja Street, covered the capture operation.
This was done to prevent random people from appearing in
this place. This information proves the statement of Mr.
Lapatik that forces of Special Units of Quick Reaction (Mr.
Pavlichenko) and of the Presidential Security Service (Mr.
Vasilchenko) were used (report from November 21 2000 to
the Minister of the Internal Affairs Naumov). One should
keep in mind that in the same time period the investigation
of a criminal case, which Mr. Gonchar was charged with,
was being held. The case was connected with the participation
of Mr. Gonchar in the alternative presidential elections
(March — June 1999) as a Chairman of the Central Electoral
Committee. Mr. Gonchar was watched (it was an operational
measure), including his movement around Minsk, his phone
talks were tapped. These actions were proved by a publication
in the newspaper "Sovetskaja Belorussia" ("Soviet
Belarus") his confidential phone talks with a Canadian
businessman Mr. Harry Ostrovskij.
In the investigator's
decision the circumstances of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij
violent kidnapping are laid down. According to the words
of a witness during the night of September, 17 1999 there
was some noise, men's screams (including cries for help)
in the area of the public bath. A person, not identified
by the investigation, dressed in the uniform and saying
that he is a policeman was asking people whether they have
heard any noise in the street. Other witnesses testify that
near the public bath building they were stopped by some
young men, who tried to stop them with the help of odd and
useless questions. One of the witnesses says that in the
night of September, 17 1999 around 23 00 she and her daughter
were walking by the building of a photo studio "Vilija",
behind which the public bath is situated. "Suddenly
a young man came up to them from behind a corner, where
the public bath is situated, and started to ask various
questions. She had a feeling that with the help of the senseless
talks he is trying to delay her and her daughter at that
place".
Thus one can say that
the investigator has established presence of a special criminal
group in the armed forces. But except this statement no
further steps were taken.
3. At the crime place
there were found fragments of a filament lamp, as well as
a lamp-socket, which was not designed for placing on Jeep
"Cherokee" (production year 1990), which was the
property of Mr. Krasovskij; car’s breaking tracks and a
track of a car’s stroke against the tree, from which some
samples of paint were taken.
According to the expert’s conclusion there were found some
micro-tractions of acrylic paint of a scarlet color on the
two presented pieces of wood. The paint can be subject to
a comparative analysis and establishment of a generic belonging
when having a comparison sample. Micro-layers on the wood
are a result of a strong dynamic contact.
According to the information
provided by Mr. Alkajev and the witness Mr. Metelskij, former
member of the Special Unit of Quick Reaction (unit #3214),
the red "BMW" (property of the car-company of
the Special Unit of Quick Reaction) was used by major Pavlichenko
(unit #3214).
But the investigators
haven’t checked whether the cars, which were at the disposal
of the Special Unit of Quick Reaction sub-units, or other
special units of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs, or
of the Presidential Security Service (Mr. Vasilchenko),
or of the Security Council (Mr. Sheiman), were used while
kidnapping Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij in the night of
September, 17 1999. The cars were not examined in order
to find characteristic damage on them and to conduct a car-identification
research taking into account found at the crime place tracks
of treads, fragments of glass, samples of paint etc. The
documentation of the indicated car departures on September,
16-17 1999 was not checked either, it was not established,
what was the aim of using the car, who was in charge of
the departures, who was the driver.
"When these people
were shot they were killed "In the name of the President",
article by the reporter Koktysh was published in the newspaper
"Narodnaja Volja" (People’s Will), # 154 from
August 22, 2001. The article contains an interview with
a member of the Special Unit of Quick Reaction (unit #3214),
who wished to stay anonymous. In the interview he refers
that in the violent captures of Mr. Zakharenko, Mr. Gonchar
and Mr. Krasovskij were participating certain soldiers of
the unit #3214: lieutenant Koklin, warrant-officers Balynin
and Murashko, Budko, Novatorskij, Mekijanets, together with
the commander of Special Unit of Quick Reaction Pavlichenko.
When going to Minsk they used a red "BMW", "Audi"
and other cars, which were in the car park of the unit.
The facts and events laid down in the article are confirmed
by the information gained during the interrogation of the
witness Metelskij, former member of the Special Unit of
Quick Reaction (unit #3214).
The decision of the investigator
Chumachenko does not indicate whether there were taken any
attempts to search and find cars with the above mentioned
damages and the Jeep “Cherokee”. No soldiers, including
the indicated above ones, of the unit #3214 were interrogated,
no cars belonging to the unit were examined, no measures
were taken to make photorobots of persons, who were asking
people in the night of September, 17 1999 near the public
bath building, to find and identify them.
4. The questions regarding
illegal issuing of the pistol for noiseless shooting (special
pistol "PB-9" # PO57C) by the officials of the
Ministry of the Internal Affairs of the Republic of Belarus,
that happened in the same time with the disappearances of
Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij, were investigated superficially
and incomplete.
The report of Mr. Alkajev
from November, 23 2000, record of his interrogation as a
witness from November 23, 2000 and the record of the examination
of the armament taking out registration book make evident
that the execution pistol was issued by order of the former
Minister of the Internal Affairs Sivakov to Mr. Dik (given
out on April, 30 1999, returned on May, 15 1999) and to
Mr. Kolesnikov (given out on September, 16 1999, returned
on September, 18 1999).
Therefore, it is established
that the execution pistol was issued on dates preceding
the disappearances of Mr. Zaharenko (in the night of May,
7 1999), Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij (in the night of
September, 17 1999), as well as the pistol's return following
them.
As was officially established
by the investigation the pistol for noiseless shooting was
used for "special actions", but not for firing
practice. But the deputy of the Minister of the Internal
Affairs Chvankin refused to provide any details about what
kind of actions took place, who and why was using the illegally
given out pistol.
According to its’ characteristics
the pistol "PB-9" is not a distance aimed shooting
arm and is used for noiseless fire point-blank shooting.
The pistol has a muffler and a flash eliminator. When shooting
the shot is made from a very close distance in the occipital
part of the convicted person’s head.
Mr. Alkajev says that
using this particular pistol Mr. Sheiman, Mr. Sivakov and
Mr. Pavlichenko worked out a scheme of so called "clean
murder", which is similar to the shooting procedure
of the people sentenced to capital punishment (Mr. Alkajev’s
interview, appendix "Dlja Sluzhebnogo Polzovanija"
("For Office Use") to the newspaper "Belorusskaja
Delovaja Gazeta" ("Belarusian Business Newspaper")
# 2 (13), February 2003).
Mr. Chvankin, being interrogated
as a witness, testified that in the end of April former
Minister of the Internal Affairs of the Republic of Belarus
Sivakov gave him an order to take in a police department
a pistol for noiseless shooting. Carrying out this order
he, being at that time deputy of the Minister of the Internal
Affairs, gave the order to the deputy of the chief of the
Equipment and Rear Arming Department of the Ministry of
the Internal Affairs Dik to take the pistol. Mr. Dik issued
an official order to give him permission to use the pistol
for firing practice of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs
central staff. After getting the permission Mr. Dik took
the pistol for noiseless shooting "PB-9" # PO57C
in the investigator’s isolation ward #1 (the chief — Mr.
Alkajev) and gave it to Mr. Chvankin. Mr. Chvankin claims
that he gave the pistol to Mr. Sivakov and it was used afterwards
for carrying out special operations, and not for firing
practice. But during the interrogation he refused to provide
any information regarding what kind of "special operations"
were carried out, who was the chief of these operations,
who and for what purposes was using the pistol.
In the appealed decision
the investigator points out that because of the refusal
of Mr. Chvankin to provide necessary information regarding
the use of the pistol "PB-9" a special inquiry
with the request to give information about whether any actions
were carried out with the use of the pistol was sent to
the Ministry of the Internal Affairs. The answer, in the
opinion of the investigator, "does not make possible
to make any definite conclusion whether the pistol, received
by Mr. Dik and M. Kolesnik in the investigator’s isolation
ward #1, was used in any operative and investigation actions
within the Ministry of the Internal Affairs".
If so, why Mr. Chvankin,
who refused to provide important for the investigation information,
was not brought to criminal responsibility? Why did not
the supervising prosecutor make a recurring inquiry to the
Ministry of the Internal Affairs chief staff regarding the
need to provide for the investigation full and truthful
information about the use of the pistol "PB-9",
together with obtaining (taking out) the document, proving
the reported information? Why are contradictions in the
witness testimony of Mr. Sivakov, Mr. Chvankin, Mr. Dik
and Mr. Kolesnik not eliminated?
The witness Kolesnik testified
that he by the order of Mr. Sivakov went to the isolation
ward, took the pistol for noiseless shooting and gave it
to Mr. Chvankin. During the investigation it is established
that Mr. Kolesnik, being the adjutant of the Minister of
the Internal Affairs Sivakov, carried out the order. Evidence
of this event are the records (together with his signature)
in the arms giving out registration book of the isolation
ward #1 from September, 19 1999 — for taking the pistol
"PB-9" # PO57C with the magazine, and from September,
18 1999 — for giving the pistol back. At the recurring interrogation
Mr. Kolesnik changed his testimony and said that after receiving
the pistol he stored it in the safe in the office and by
Mr. Sivakov order handed in the pistol to the isolation
ward # 1.
Mr. Sivakov, when being
interrogated as a witness, said that he does not remember
whether he gave any orders of the kind either to Mr. Chvankin
or Mr. Kolesnik. But no confrontations of the interrogated
persons in order to eliminate considerable contradictions
in the testimonies of the witnesses were carried out and
the reasons why Mr. Kolesnik changed his testimony were
not found out. This is a violation of the norms (particularly
Art. 222) of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic
of Belarus.
The decision of the chief
of the investigation group Branchel from November, 27 2000
to carry out an expert examination on the criminal case
# 414100 and other records of the case make clear that the
pistol taken out from the isolation ward # 1 could have
been used in the circumstances of the murder of the Nasibov
family; of the Agajev brother and sister; of the leader
of the unregistered Belarusian regional association "Russian
Nation Unity" Mr. Samojlov; of Zhlobin and Marjina
Gorka citizens Yasko and Sojko; when kidnapping Mr. Grachev
— the chief inspector of the Ministry of Culture of the
Republic of Belarus; of businessman Mr. Bykov; when kidnapping
people with their following disappearance — the operator
of the Russian Broadcasting Company "Russian Public
Television" Belarusian Bureau Mr. Zavadskij; the Director
of Marjina Gorka transport enterprise Mr. Kotov, and in
other crimes.
According to the expert’s
conclusion # 184 from November, 27 2000 (the expert – deputy
of the chief of the Central Military Forensic Medicine Laboratory
of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs Major Goroshko)
presented for the examination pistol "PB-9" #
PO57C is in good technical repair and is suitable for shooting;
the shots without pressure on the trigger are impossible;
the shots from the pistol were made after the last cleaning
before the examination.
The sentence of Minsk
region court from March, 14 2000 on the criminal case charging
Mr. Ignatovich, Mr. Malik, Mr. Guz and Mr. Saushkin, which
convicted these people for kidnapping operator of the Russian
Broadcasting Company "Russian Public Television"
Mr. Zavadskij, as well as the case materials, which were
separated from this criminal case, make clear that the Ignatovich
gang and other not identified persons were armed, including
the pistols for noiseless shooting with a muffler. When
Mr. Ingnatovich attacked Ms. Tolstik and her lover Mr. Borisov
(town Zhodino, Minsk region), Yasko (town Borisov), he was
armed with a pistol with a muffler. The same pistol had
Mr. Malik — a member of his gang. It is worth to point out
that in the period of the charged crimes commitment Mr.
Malik was a soldier of a special unit for anti-terror struggle
"Diamond" ("Almaz") of the Ministry
of the Internal Affairs; Mr. Ignatovich was a former soldier
of the same unit; Convicted Guz was a Ministry of the Internal
Affairs Academy student.
In the recorded cases,
which were separated from this case there are evidences
that Mr. Sivakov gave the pistol to Mr. Pavlichenko, who
gave it to Mr. Malik, Mr. Ignatovich and other persons for
using it while committing crimes. Nevertheless the question
regarding participation of the Ignatovich gang members in
the criminal actions of the so called "death squadrons",
which were mentioned in the media, were not examined during
the investigation process.
5. In the connection with
the circumstances found out during the investigation of
the criminal case # 414100 Mr. Pavlichenko was interrogated
both as a witness and a suspected person, was arrested and
put in the isolation ward of the State Security Committee
(KGB) on the approvement of the General Prosecutor of the
Republic of Belarus deputy based on the norms of the Presidential
Decree from October, 21 1997 # 21 "On the urgent measures
of the anti-terror and other grave violent crimes struggle"
(see the inquiry of the representative of the Parliament
Mr. Frolov from November, 18 2002, reference number 15/01
— 593-99-1). His interrogations were recorded with a video
camera (Art. 192, 193, 219 of the Criminal Procedure Code).
But within a day by the order of Mr. Sheiman Mr. Pavlichenko
was released without giving any procedural document of the
prosecutor or investigator to the isolation ward administration.
It was not found out by the investigation whether Mr. Sheiman
was acting on his own discretion or on someone's order,
whether he exceeded his authority with these acts.
6. It draws attention
that in the kidnapping Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij, as
well as in the circumstances of Mr. Sojko murder, in the
kidnapping and possible murder of Mr. Kotov, in the Nasibov
family murder, in the kidnapping and violence to Mr. Grachev
and Mr. Bykov were acting people in the special uniform
of the police or special units. Salvation of the crimes,
which cast aspersions on the representatives of public bodies,
is of great importance. Absence of the investigation results
prove either (1) that the officials of the law protecting
bodies participate in those crimes and therefore they don't
want to investigate the cases fully and impartially; or
(2) that the people who work in the investigation departments
are not qualified enough to solve such grave crimes.
7. The importance of the
successful salvation of the crimes connected with the disappearances
of Mr. Zaharenko, Mr. Gonchar, Mr. Krasovskij and others,
and the intent attention of the public both in Belarus and
abroad were not taken into account when charging the investigator
of the Minsk prosecutor's department Chumachenko without
any kind of operational support. The investigation group,
which was created before and consisted of experienced Prosecutors'
office of the Republic of Belarus, State Security Committee
(KGB) and the Ministry of the Internal Affairs officials,
who achieved considerable success in the investigation,
was removed from the investigation of the case after resignation
of the General Prosecutor Bozhelko and the Chairman of the
State Security Committee (KGB) Matskevich.
8. When introducing the
new chief of the State Security Committee (KGB) Mr. Jerin
the President of the Republic of Belarus said that "coup
d'etat was prevented in the country", but never mentioned
any information regarding the names of the conspirators.
In this and other speeches Mr. Lukashenko pointed out that
Mr. Pavlichenko was illegally arrested and he would therefore
introduce the journalists and the public evidence of his
innocence. But this hasn't happened.
If the Prosecutors' office
of the Republic of Belarus, State Security Committee (KGB)
and the Ministry of the Internal Affairs officials were
falsifying the evidence having the aim to discredit the
highest officials of the state (Mr. Sheiman, Mr. Sivakov
and others) by their participation in committing the grave
crimes, and Mr. Pavlichenko was deliberately illegally arrested
and held in custody, the guilty persons have to bear criminal
responsibility for committing crimes against justice. No
one from the investigation group members did face even a
summary punishment. Mr. Bozhelko is in the presidential
reserve; Mr. Matskevich is an ambassador in Yugoslavia.
On the contrary, the victims of the regime became those
who disclosed the results of the preliminary investigation
on the disappearances to the public. Some of them had to
leave secretly the country and seek political asylum (Mr.
Alkajev, Mr. Petrushkevich, Mr. Sluchek, Mr. Ugljanitsa
and others).
9. Mr. Chumachenko rejected
numerous petitions, which were aimed to bring to life our
procedural rights (including the criminal prosecution of
the suspects), without any considerable grounds.
Admission of the victims’
representative Mr. Pogonajlo was illegally rejected, although
he is authorized to represent our interests in the public
bodies and courts of the Republic of Belarus.
Citizens Sheiman, Sivakov,
Lapatik, Naumov, Pavlichenko, Leonov, Kez, Dik, Chvankin,
Kolesnik, Koklin, Murashko, Mekijanets, Novatorskij and
others were not fully interrogated regarding the information
about the disappearances they possess. In some cases considerable
contradictions in the witness testimonies were not eliminated.
The investigation measures, aimed to establish the fact
that some material evidence (the pistol "PB-9"
# PO57C) and case records (including those regarding Mr.
Pavlichenko) were lost, were not carried out.
When refusing to satisfy
our petition to interrogate the above mentioned persons,
Mr. Chumachenko in his decision from October, 3 2002 referred,
that "the decision on the necessity to carry out certain
investigation measures, their order and tactics, the decision
to charge someone with a crime and other questions are determined
by the investigator, who is in charge of the case".
The decision further states that "according to point
6 Art. 34 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic
of Belarus the prosecutor is authorized to give written
orders to lower prosecutor, investigator, the inquiry body
and officials regarding carrying out investigation and other
procedural and operational measures". Therefore, not
denying the arguments regarding the validity of the petition
requesting to carry out some investigation measures, the
investigator points out that (1) he will decide to carry
out those measures on his own, and on the contrary that
(2) not the victims may suggest him in written form to carry
out certain investigation measures — it is an exclusive
right of the higher prosecutor. The prosecutor didn't give
the investigator any written orders of the kind.
10. Having made the decision
to suspend the investigation of the case the investigator
has not carried out any of the investigation measures we
asked for in our petitions. Thus, the investigator neglected
his duties (which are written down in the law) to conduct
full, comprehensive and impartial investigation of the criminal
case circumstances and to fulfill the rule of law principle.
In the decision from January
10 2003 only evaluations and conclusions of the first investigation
actions (examination of the crime place, questioning of
the eyewitnesses, fixation of the found crime tracks, expert
examination of some of the evidence) were stated. It contains
the circumstances of the pistol "PB-9" taking
out, salvation of some questions not directly connected
with the salvation of the whole case. The content of the
decision proves the inactivity of the investigator Chumachenko
in the period of more than 3 years.
The attitude of the investigator
to the case is reflected in his decisions, which reject
the petitions of the victims. In the decision from January,
13 2003, which rejects the petition regarding the interrogation
of the witness Lapatik, the investigator referred that "according
to point 5 Art. 60 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the
Republic of Belarus prosecutor, investigator, inquiry official,
secretary of the court can not be interrogated as witnesses
regarding the information about the circumstances of the
crime they possess because of working on this case. When
writing the report Mr. Lapatik was a chief of the criminal
police department of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs,
was directly involved in the carrying out of the investigation
measures and actions the case # 414100. His report was written
on the basis of this case. Therefore Mr. Lapatik cannot
be interrogated regarding circumstances of the confidential
information receiving ". In this case the investigator
not only mispresented the sense of the law, but also demonstrated
his obvious reluctance to investigate the case fully and
impartially.
11. It is important to
point out that Mr. Lapatik report is not a procedural, but
an official document to the Minister of the Internal Affairs.
Mr. Lapatik was not a member of the investigation group
on the case # 414100 and cannot be a participant of the
criminal procedure on this case.
Information and facts
presented in his report had to be examined during the investigation
and fixed as evidence as required by the criminal procedure
law. As it is prescribed by Art. 101 of the Criminal Procedure
Code of the Republic of Belarus "materials, which are
gained during the operative actions may be used as a source
of evidence if they are gained in accordance with the legislation
of the Republic of Belarus, presented, examined and evaluated
in order, written down in the present Code". According
to this norm on the resolution of the Minister of the Internal
Affairs Naumov from November, 21 2000 this report was sent
to the chief of the investigation group on the case #414100
Mr. Branchel for investigation. Nevertheless Mr. Lapatik
was never interrogated as a witness on this case, although
he possesses important information about the circumstances
of the violent disappearance of our husbands. Establishment
of the indicated in the report events authenticity is crucial
for this criminal case.
Legally the report of
Mr. Lapatik is a memorandum of the criminal police department
of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs chief to the Minister
of the Internal Affairs regarding the operational salvation
of the violent disappearance of Mr. Zaharenko, Mr. Gonchar
and Mr. Krasovskij, which included names of the direct organizers
and perpetrators of the crime (Mr. Sheiman, Mr. Sivakov,
Mr. Pavlichenko and others), probable burial place of the
disappeared.
Information which is laid
down in the Lapatik report is approved and specified by
the report of the investigator’s isolation ward #1 chief
Alkajev, which contains information about giving out the
pistol just before the disappearance of the politicians;
by other materials, which became the ground for the arrest
and detention of major Pavlichenko; by the petition of the
General Prosecutor of the Republic of Belarus Bozhelko and
Chairman of the State Security Committee (KGB) Matskevich
to the President to arrest Secretary of the Security Council
Sheiman and ex-Minister of the Internal Affairs Sivakov.
It is established that
the General Prosecutor of the Republic of Belarus Bozhelko
asked the General Prosecutor of the Russian Federation to
provide him with special equipment to find the buried bodies.
Therefore a special official letter regarding providing
technical support was sent to Moscow. But on the prosecutors
office of the Republic of Belarus initiative the letter
was recalled, the equipment did not come to Belarus and
the search operations were not held (inquiry of the representatives’
group "Respublika" ("Republic") of the
Chamber of Representatives of the Parliament to the Chairman
of the State Security Committee (KGB) Jerin — newspaper
"Narodnaja Volja" ("People’s will"),
# 31 (1594) from February, 18 2002).
Dismissed from their sits
by the President Mr. Matskevich and Mr. Bozhelko, who possess
important information about the circumstances of the investigated
cases were not interrogated by the investigator.
In these circumstances,
after the appointing of Mr. Sheiman, who as we think participated
in committing the crime, the General Prosecutor the investigation
was de facto suspended, many of the evidences were taken
out from the case and destroyed.
Confirmation of the noted above is investigator’s Chumachenko
answer to the petition of the victims regarding the check
of the pistol “PB-9” # PO57C safety and restoration of the
lost materials of the criminal case # 414100, including
those regarding the arrest, interrogation and detention
of Mr. Pavlichenko.
In the decision from November,
30 2002 to reject the petition he points out: "at present
the investigation does not have any information, whether
the pistol “PB-9” # PO57C in the isolation ward # 1. If
Mrs. Krasovskaja knows anything specific about whether this
pistol was destroyed, she should inform the investigation
about the source of this information".
And further: "at present the investigation does not
possess any information, whether Mr. Pavlichenko has given
any testimonies after his detention and in what capacity
he was interrogated. If Mrs. Gonchar knows anything about
this question, she should inform the investigation about
the source of this information and about the content of
this interrogation. In this case Mr. Pavlichenko will be
interrogated once again taking into account the new data.
Meanwhile the Ministry
of the Internal Affairs and of the State Security Committee
(KGB) officials were obliged by the inquiry of the investigator
to provide him with this information, and he should (taking
into account established facts) carry out additional investigation
measures, on which we insist. Higher prosecutor’s office,
where we sent our petition on the acts of the investigator,
agreed with his decision.
All the above mentioned
information leads us to the conclusion that the investigation
of the case is blocked by those who are in charge of it
and those who are supervising the legality of its’ conduct.
It is possible that some materials, which were found by
the investigation and prove participation of the state highest
officials in committing these crimes, are intentionally
being hidden.
12. The report in the
media cannot be the basis for bringing a criminal case to
court, but if the investigation of the crime has already
begun, all the circumstances mentioned in this report should
be carefully examined and proved or disproved (part 2 Art.
88, 89, 96, 100 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic
of Belarus).
This norm is violated, because many publications, TV- and
video-materials, which are part of the recorded case and
are important to solve it if developing the version of participation
of the special units in disappearances of Mr. Zaharenko,
Mr. Gonchar, Mr. Krasovskij and Mr. Zavadskij, were not
investigated and are not even mentioned in the decision
to suspend the investigation.
According to part 5 Art.
246 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus
"before suspending the investigation investigator,
inquiry official are obliged to carry out all investigation
measures, which are possible to carry out without a charged
person, take all measures to find this person, to identify
the crime or to find the disappeared person". This
norm of the law is not fulfilled and therefore the decision
is subject to repeal.
When renewing the investigation
it is necessary to carry out the following investigation
measures:
1) To take out from Minsk
region court archives the recorded criminal case # 414100
charging Mr. Ignatovich, Mr. Malik, Mr. Guz, Mr. Saushkin,
and the criminal cases separated from this case, and attach
materials of these cases regarding participation in the
disappearances of certain state officials, who were mentioned
in the published by the independent media documents from
the case # 414100 (particularly the reports of Mr. Lapatik
and Mr. Alkajev), to check and evaluate these materials;
2) To prove or disprove
the information, provided by a member of the Special Unit
of Quick Reaction (unit #3214) and published in the article
by the reporter Marina Koktysh "When these people were
shot they were killed "In the name of the President.."”
in the newspaper "Narodnaja Volja" ("People’s
Will"), #154 from August, 22 2001, it is necessary
to identify and interrogate the persons, named in the publication.
In this article the anonymous (not identified by the investigator)
named specific facts about the circumstances of Mr. Gonchar
and Mr. Krasovskij violent kidnapping by the soldiers of
the special military unit # 3214 using "BMW" and
"Audi", which were the property of the Special
Unit of Quick Reaction. Among the participants he mentioned
not only major Pavlichenko, but also soldiers Koklin, Balynin,
Murashko, Budko, Novatorskij, Mekijanets and others, whose
names he does not remember, but could identify. "One
of them is often shown on TV in an advertising about special
units – he is standing near the banner of the unit"
(the information is confirmed by the witness Metelskij);
3) To interrogate former
chief of the Criminal police Lapatik, Minister of the Internal
Affairs Naumov, ex-Minister of the Internal Affairs Sivakov,
ex-Secretary of the Security Council Sheiman, major Pavlichenko,
Mr. Vasilchenko to find out the facts and events they know
about the disappearances of the persons, which are being
investigated; to pass a decision to dismiss them from their
positions for the period of the investigation;
4) To check legality and
validity of the arrest and subsequent release from the isolation
ward of Mr. Pavlichenko, who is suspected in committing
violent kidnapping and possible physical elimination of
the disappeared;
5) To interrogate former
General Prosecutor Bozhelko, ex-Secretary of the Security
Council Matskevich, who possesses information, which was
the basis for the detention and interrogation of Mr. Pavlichenko;
6) To interrogate officers
and soldiers of the special units of the Presidential Security
Service, Security Council and Ministry of the Internal Affairs,
who might be participants and witnesses of the criminal
events;
7) To take out from the
isolation ward # 1 the pistol "PB-9" # PO56C,
which according to the report of Mr. Alkajev and Mr. Lapatik
was used when committing mentioned crimes, and fix it as
a material evidence;
8) When investigating
circumstances of the illegal taking out of the pistol "PB-9"
# PO57C from the isolation ward # 1:
— read through the secret
official instructions, which lays down the order of carrying
out death sentences by shooting, attach to the recorded
case necessary writings out of it;
— find and attach to the recorded case letter of the Minister
of the Internal Affairs deputy Chvankin with the resolution
of the Punishments Carrying out Committee chief Kadushkin,
which contains a request to give out the pistol “probably
for carrying out practice shooting” (as Mr. Alkajev testifies
while interrogation on November, 24 2000); report of Mr.
Dik to Mr. Chvankin with the request to give out the pistol
(record of the interrogation of Mr. Chvankin);
— taking into account established circumstances interrogate
once again all the persons who are indicated in our petitions
connected with the taking out of the pistol, its’ use before
giving back to the isolation ward # 1;
— restore the lost materials of the criminal case # 414100,
including the records of Mr. Pavlichenko interrogations
regarding his detention, custody and their grounds;
— take out from the isolation ward the documents, which
prove that he was held there in custody;
— interrogate officials of the State Security Committee
isolation ward and the State Security Committee chief officials
regarding who and on the basis of what document (or oral
order) took Mr. Pavlichenko into custody and released him
from the isolation ward; give legal evaluation of the gained
information;
— with witnesses and in the isolation ward # 1 carry out
taking out of the pistol "PB-9" # PO57C and attach
it to the case materials as a material evidence;
— establish whether such pistols were part of the Ministry
of the Internal Affairs armament, particularly in the Special
Unit of Quick Reaction , were major Pavlichenko was serving,
or they were stored in a special depot;
— find out whether this and other armament was shot off
in order to increase shell database to identify arms;
— find out whether there is any information in the shell
database regarding the pistol "PB-9"” # PO57C,
if no – why;
9) To check the information,
which is available to the investigation and is pointing
to the political motivation of the committed crime;
10) Carry out other investigation
measures, which will help to solve this criminal case, to
find guilty persons and bring them to justice;
Based on the written above and Art. 50, 138-140,
142, part 2 Art. 249 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the
Republic of Belarus, we
Request
1) To overrule the decision of the investigator
Chumachenko from January, 20 2003 regarding suspension of
the investigation of the case # 110351;
2) To restore the investigation of this case and give written
orders to the investigators to carry out the investigation
measures, which we insist on;
3) To dismiss from the investigation of this case the investigator
Chumachenko;
4) To ask the Prosecutors’ Office of the Republic of Belarus
to create an investigation group, which would consist of
highly qualified specialists from the Prosecutors’ Office,
State Security Committee and Ministry of the Internal Affairs;
5) Taking into account the gravity and circumstances of
the committed crime and the fact that the prosecutors office,
which charged this case and carried out the investigation
is headed by a person, who is suspected by us, give this
criminal case to the investigators of the State Security
Committee of the Republic of Belarus.
Victims: Mrs. Gonchar
Mrs. Krasovskaja
|