At trial on attack on Nalchik, prosecution is against jurymen

In the Supreme Court of Kabardino-Balkaria, at the trial on the events on October 13, 2005, the prosecution petitioned to reject the request lodged by advocates and defendants to transfer the case to the Chairman of the Supreme Court for consideration by a jury.

The State Accuser Olga Chibinyova referred to Statement of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of April 19, 2010, which specifies that "in case of impossibility to form an objective and impartial board of jurymen, the right of citizens to have their cases considered within reasonable terms by lawful and fair courts, which under the current legislation are the courts comprising three professional judges, shall not be restricted."

Ms Chibinyova emphasized that the selection of the board of jurymen on this case was undertaken from May 14, 2008, to December 2008. All the candidates for jurymen, both from the main and additional lists, as approved by the President of Kabardino-Balkaria, were invited. However, the jury was not formed, because the events on October 13-14, 2005, in the city of Nalchik had not only received a broad public resonance, but also touched plenty of people, many of whom were eyewitnesses of individual episodes of the armed attack or have relatives on this or that side.

"In accordance with Article 61 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the above circumstances made impossible any participation of such persons in this litigation as judges," the State Accuser concluded.

Ms Chibinyova also referred to the studies performed by the Institute of Humanitarian Studies at the Government of Kabardino-Balkaria in 2006, according to which "everyone out of at least 53 percent of candidates for jurymen has relative links "both among militiamen and among militants."

"Experts-ethnographers engaged in studying family trees of Kabardians and Balkars have concluded impossibility to form a jury from among the residents of the republic," she has emphasized.

Besides, as she reminded, the judicial disposition of the Constitutional Court's Statement runs that transfer of terrorism-related cases does not contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

In their objections, advocates and defendants tried to challenge the arguments of the prosecution. Lawyer Tatiana Psomiadi said, in particular, that at checking the reliability of the certificate issued by the Institute of Humanitarian Studies it turned out that three out of four scientists who had signed the conclusion had already died, while the fourth one said that he had never made any studies.

In this context defendant Malyshev said that the defendants are mainly Kabardians and Balkars, while many other nationalities live in the republic.

Both defendants and their advocates spoke against the argument about impossibility to form a jury.

The court will announce its decision on Monday, May 17.