Kabardino-Balkaria: trial on Nalchik attack case makes a break

The Supreme Court of Kabardino-Balkaria has announced a two-week break in litigation on the Nalchik attack. The last court session on September 3 listened to evidences of Alik Shorov, an employee of the local Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA), who was, on October 13, 2005, the head of the service of district militiamen.

The state prosecutor Shmatov asked the witness, whether he knew about the so-called "preventive lists". Shorov said that such lists were compiled by the UBOP (Department to Fight Organized Crime) and the FSB (Federal Security Bureau); they were given to district militiamen, who were instructed to hold preventive conversation with the enlisted persons.

"In 2004, together with the public prosecutor of the republic, we went to villages and held rallies there, saying to people that the radical Islam is a wrong Islam," said the witness.

Defendant Mironov asked the witness about the grounds for district militiamen to judge, when giving a characteristic, that "the person professes the radical Islam." The witness explained that militiamen talked to neighbours and village administrations, and wrote characteristics on the basis of gathered information.

"Could these biased characteristics result in illegal placing into the list, persecutions and home searches?" asked Mironov and added that these persecutions were one of the reasons of the tragedy that happened on October 13, 2005.

The witness answered that local district militiamen subordinated not to him but head of ROVDs (District Interior Divisions), while his duty was to render methodical help.

"Can you give an official definition of the notion 'Wahhabism'?" asked defendant Murat Midov.

"No," Shorov answered.

To the question, whether dissemination of the ideas of Wahhabism is forbidden by the law in the territory of the republic, the witness answered: "Yes. It is forbidden everywhere." To what Midov objected: "I'll inform you - it's not forbidden."

The defendant also asked, whether Wahhabism was recognized in Russia a forbidden religion. The witness answered that he did not know.

"Why did you then organize rallies and said there that 'the radical Islam is a wrong one'?" asked Midov. Shorov said that the initiative of the rallies came from residents themselves. He did not know about the aim of the rallies.

The witness also gave negative answers to the questions, whether Shorov's employees passed any training and whether they knew what religious currents were forbidden in Russia. Besides, he could not answer the question about his knowledge of the forbidden literature.

To the question of defendant Sokmyshev, whether he knew that district militiamen came to mosques and registered everyone who was there, the witness answered: "No, I didn't know that."

Sokmyshev also asked why if a young man does not drink, does not smoke, has a beard and goes to the mosque, he becomes suspicious; and what the criteria were of enlisting as Wahhabites. The witness answered that he saw nothing bad in religion as such.

Defendant Murat Kashirgov asked the witness, whether he remembered that in 2004, after the Beslan events, he was present at a rally in Shalushka, together with the former public prosecutor of the republic, and threatened the Moslems who had rallied there.

After the long and emotionally intense interrogation by the defendants, the witness - a MIA employee - said that he felt bad. Then, a break was announced in the trial.