Magomed Evloev's father requests Prosecutor's committee of inquiry for starting new criminal proceedings on his son's murder

On October, 14, Magomed Evloev, father of the murdered Ingush oppositionist Yahya Evloev, submitted an appeal to the Prosecutor's committee of inquiry under Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation asking to start new criminal proceedings in connection with a "newly-discovered evidence". He also submitted a statement to Alexander Bastrykin, head of the office.

According to Yahya Evloev, Ibrahim Evloev convicted for his son's murder and afterwards murdered, too, had submitted complaints to the Ministry of Interior Affairs of the Russian Federation and the Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation asking a question: "How could I open fire if there had been five men in the cabin and at the same time there were only four figurants in the case, the murdered Magomed Evloev including?".

The father thinks this Ibrahim Evloev's statement could be an evidence of the fact that his son's murderers had hidden one of the witnesses out of fear that he "would tell the truth about Magomed Evloev's murder".

In his statement the oppositionist's father expressed an opinion that the whole investigation process had been guided by high-ranking militia officers of Ingushetia. He reminded of the report of Salman Belkharoev, officer in the Ministry of Interior Affairs who had done the official inspection, in which he wrote that he "had not collected any documents, nor interrogated anyone and under his bosses' pressure just signed a blank paper".

Evloev also remarked that in the beginning of the investigation the participators of the murder who had been in the car were not isolated from one another and could match their evidence.

Yahya Evloev also said that the statement of investigator Shankhoev that the resolution of Magomed Evloev's arrest was drawn up already after the oppositionist's death "had got any due estimation neither by the investigation nor the court".

Yahya Evloev considers that the opinion of the expert who had carried out the primary expertise that "the pistol's trigger was in good order and there could be no shot without pressing it" had also been out of estimation. So, according to Evloev, the expert had disproved the defendant's version that the shot had been an accidental one. 

Musa Pliev, the Evloevs attorney, explained that according to the law, ten days should be counted out since October, 14, the date of submitting the appeal, and during this period Bastrykin's office had to take a decision whether to start criminal proceedings or not. Pliev thinks that "if there is a political will to do so the investigation can be recommenced".