Defendants in case of Guba riots deny charges against them

Today, the Guba District Court held court hearing on the case of riots in the city of Guba in Azerbaijan, which occurred on March 1. AT the court hearing, the defendants denied the charges against them. Lawyers of the defendants, accused in the case of the riots in Guba, complain against biased investigation.

On March 1, Guba held a rally to demand resignation of Rauf Gabibov, Chief Executive of the District. The protest action, which was attended by up to 10,000 persons, turned into the riots, during which the protestors burned down the villa of Rauf Gabibov and several accessory buildings of executive authorities. In this case, the Guba District Court holds three trials, and the prisoners' dock contains 8, 9 and 7 defendants.

Today, the Court listened to deliberate testimony of the defendants Akif Aliev and Gabil Aliev. In his conversation with the "Caucasian Knot", local lawyer Rauf Kyazimov, the lawyer of Gabil Aliev, reported that both defendants completely denied the charges against them.

"All that my client did he broke two bottles at the villa of Rauf Gabibov. However, despite that, Gabil Aliev, who is himself an invalid of the Karabakh War and who lost his brother at the war, has been kept in custody for 9 months. The repeated motions to change the measure of pre-trial restriction against him are not satisfied. I am simply short of words to express my indignation at such a heartless," the lawyer said.

He has emphasized that the preliminary investigation was conducted with violations of procedures, no protocols of confrontations were completed, and no examinations were conducted.

The court hearing on the case will be continued on November 7. Then, the Court is to listen to testimonies of witnesses and victims.

According to lawyer Mirza Azizov, all defendants in three trials are ordinary participants of the events and they were involved in them under the influence of the video that they had watched on the Internet.

The lawyer Mirza Azizov believes that it would be more reasonable to bring to justice the organizers of the events first and only then the ordinary participants of the events.