|
Will the Strasbourg Court's verdict unravel the mysteries of the 'Nord-Ost' tragedy?  Vladimir Kara-Murza: The Strasbourg court found Russia guilty of Human Rights violations during during the assault of Dubrovka in Moscow. While trying to rescue the 'Nord-Ost' hostages, the Russian authorities violated the right to life — Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
After 8 years of litigation the Strasbourg court ruled that they had to pay 64 plaintiffs compensation from 8 thousand to 66 thousand euros. This was stated in an announcement by the ECHR, which was published on the organization's website. Our citizens who turned to the court say that the Russian authorities used unreasonable force, did not provide timely medical assistance to the hostages, as well as ineffectively investigating the attack. We are talking with Karinna Moskalenko about whether the Strasbourg court's verdict will unravel the mysteries of the 'Nord-Ost' tragedy. Moskalenko is the lawyer for the victims of the 'Nord-Ost' attack, while Elena Milashina is a columnist from 'Novaya Gazeta', and Dmitri Milovidov is an activist for the 'Nord-Ost' public organization. What is the meaning and principal value of the Strasbourg court's verdict?
Karina Moskalenko: Thank you for your question, and thank your for your invitation to be on your show. Thanks for asking the question, which brings us back to the merits of the verdict in this case. It is about the right to life. For these last two days I have been hearing all sorts of things, from the million (euros), which has been discussed far and wide, whether this is a lot or a little, on whether the Russian authorities were correct in using the gas, and about the myth that has grown up about the safety of thisgas. I have heard pretty much everything and anything. Let us return to the essence of this legal decision — it is a verdict on a violation of many of our citizens' right to life. So many people died. It has been almost 9 years for these people, since, back in April, even back in March of 2003 we readied our complaint. You know, we started with the Second Article — the Right to Life, Article Two of the European Convention protects a negative right that is associated with the right to life, concerning the inadmissibility of depriving of the life of someone under the jurisdiction of a state, as well as positive rights under this law, which are guaranteed by Article Two. Some of the state's positive obligations under this Right to Life were not carried out, according to the Strasbourg Court, and this is very important, not everything was done to in order to save lives. You know, there is another point that is hard for people to understand if they do not deal with European Court procedures in general. The positive obligations of the Right to Life, by the state in the sense of conducting a fair, objective, efficient, and appropriate investigation. What did the Strasbourg Court say in this regard? That stated that as far as the rescue operations, those persons who planned and carried out this operation, they did protect peoples' lives, they perhaps tried to save them, but could not, or perhaps they planned something incorrectly, and with respect to these actions there has never been a proper investigation carried out. An investigation was conducted into the actions of terrorists, and here everything was more or less evident, though not in every respect, but these people have escaped responsibility. And this was wrong, because the hostages, their families and their loved ones, they did not want to see someone in jail, they did not want to seeany harsh punishments, they only demanded that, firstly, the truth be established about all these circumstances, and to what extent was the State responsible. And that those who did nothing or did something wrong, that they be help responsible for that which they were responsible.
Vladimir Kara-Murza: What do you think, can one consider the verdict a moral victory for the victims?
Elena Milashina: Of course, this is a victory, not only for the victims of 'Nord-Ost', but also the victims of Beslan, for the victims of Volgodonsk, for the victims of the apartment bombings in Moscow on Kashirsk and Guryanov, and for many victims of terrorist attacks in Russia who could not reach the European Court in due time for various reasons. These have not been investigated; they had no such organization like 'Nord-Ost'. It is also reassuring to those whose complaints are now before the European Court — primarily the victims of the Beslan tragedy. Now I even understand what decision Strasbourg might reach concerning Beslan in a few years. This decision in Strasbourg is a sensational verdict, a precedent-setting one. And it is, in fact, a decision for all Russian citizens who simply turned a blind eye 9 years ago when remembering those terrible October days, those three days, our feelings and our total helplessness to do anything. Because on the one hand there was this incredible cruelty, while on the other hand there was the state, which showed the very same brutality as terrorists as well as our inability in general to do anything. And for 9 years people have been waiting for justice, because in Russia it is impossible to get adequate answers to the questions, in Russia Putin's government is always making black out to be white, and while to be black. According to Strasbourg in its decision, anticipating the decision itself they discuss the gas and state that they need to solve the contradictions between the parties in the complaint, because the applicant refers to a poisonous gas, a dangerous substance, while the Russian government insists on calling the gas harmless and does not see a causal link between the use of gas and the deaths of hostages. Because for all these years, on every anniversary of 'Nord-Ost', if the state even recalls it, they spoke to us in the guise of various representatives that the gas is harmless, that people died of chronic illnesses aggravated by being weakened from lack of food and drink, that they died from stress, but not from the gas. Now these lies have been put to rest. This is important for all of us because it may be that this verdict might prevent further attempts by the authorities to use the tragedy to their advantage and tells lies over the bones of the victims.
Karina Moskalenko: Lena, let me just say that this is not the end of it, only a pause. Because let us not forget about the dozens of doctors who signed those crazy medical reports giving their expert opinions that the gas was not the cause of death. What I would like right now is that they…
Elena Milashina: It was not the doctors — it was the forensic examiners.
Karina Moskalenko: Well, I am sorry, but they are doctors. We all know how they took the Hippocratic Oath. So, for the sake of conjuncture, how was it even possible for them to write such lies about the cause of death? The authorities act like the authorities, but here I am talking about doctors. Vladimir Kara-Murza: What issues relating to the assault still remain unanswered 8 years after the tragedy?
Dmitry Milovidov: Outside the investigation there remains one very important issue: could the use of this special substance resolve the hostage situation? Recall that it did not act instantaneously. According to the investigation, for 10 minutes the terrorists returned fire with 13 assault rifles and 8 pistols. In addition, according to this same investigative materials, this substance had color and a smell, that, in fact, could have provoked a responce from the terrorists, one, which, fortunately, did not happen. This is one of the main issues, and, most importantly, why was there no (medical) rescue operation readied?
Vladimir Kara-Murza: Joining us in our conversation is Svetlana Gubareva — she is one of the victims of the terrorist attack, and one of the authors and compilers of the «Book of Memory.»
Dmitry Milovidov: She is our coordinator, she drove us to do this book.
Vladimir Kara-Murza: Are you satisfied with the verdict of the Strasbourg court?
Svetlana Gubareva: I first want to say that Dmitry Milovidov was my hands, feet, and eyes in Moscow, because I am physically located in Kazakhstan and so I could not communicate actively with the victims'relatives. So much of the success for this book was due to his work as well. As for the verdict, I side with Karina Akopovna (Moskalenko) — this is not the end, just a pause. And the court's decision, which should encourage Russia to conduct an investigation, does not mean that Russia will carry out an investigation, or that it will be an effective one. Our task is to put maximum effort so that it is so.
Vladimir Kara-Murza: How do you understand it, does this verdict oblige the Russian authorities to reopen the investigation?
Karina Moskalenko: What do you think, if the European Court in its decision writes that one of the violations of the applicants' right to life was that there was no proper investigation made, that many details have been lost or hidden, and of course, the applicants' demand for a proper investigation — this is the first condition set by the European Court for carrying out its decision.
Vladimir Kara-Murza: We are taking a question from Moscow listener Ilya.
Listener: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Special thanks to Karina Akopovna, who, in my opinion, continues the tradition of the great lawyers Kalistratov and Kaminski, who at one time defended dissidents in terms of something similar. The question is: recently the well-known attorney Barshcheuski spoke out and said that the special operation that was carried out was brilliant, and one of the best in the history of the security services. And the whole problem was that drove a «first aid» and a sufficient number of doctors, but for purposes of secrecy they were not told which gas will be used. As far as I know, it is still unknown. Do you agree with this view? And another question: if the urrent Russian authorities, who have the stigma of a gun will not do the things on which insists that the Strasbourg Court, in your opinion, failure to something they face? As they say, the law in the West and in Russia's grace.
Dmitry Milovidov: On all these issues we have in 2006 published our report, «Nord-Ost. Unfinished investigation.» They are collected from the case and the testimony of doctors, soldiers and special forces testimony and the testimony of rescuers, which give a true picture of the situation, preparing anybody for anything, who had some information about the transaction. The fact that neither Mr. Barshchevsky or other eminent lawyers, give comments and do not wish to familiarize themselves with the case — that is their problem. Unfortunately, this principle of our nation's abysmal — do not know, but discuss.
Karina Moskalenko: I think my colleague Michael Barshchevsky not very human. It is true, I read that printout conversation on «Echo of Moscow», he misspoke several times that he did not read the decision. But his statement that it was a brilliant operation, probably just not based on a decision of the European Court. And if this is his personal opinion, I would have advised him to meet with my principals and listen the story of how this operation was carried out. So I think it will have less enthusiasm about it. Once again, the European Court, not to mention the investigation, referred to the lost or concealed facts. Why do these facts have been lost or hidden? Perhaps the hidden fact that exposes the power. And so the investigation can reveal these facts, and then absolutely can not be excluded that there will be a new decision by the European Court, which will be further extended argument about the wrongness of actions taken by the Russian authorities. Anyway, before the investigation.
You ask me whether I thought that it was absolutely necessary and can lead to some kind of result? We will not let the authorities do not conduct this investigation, we will continue to as long as necessary, to awaken to the fact that they carry out, in the execution of the decision had finally properly investigated. You will say — it took many years. It's true, but there is so much material and there is so much data that allow progress in this investigation. And those facts that are hidden, it is necessary to require their provision. Here are today with Svetlana Gubareva thought out action plan and list of issues. Let them try the Russian authorities to bring criminal proceedings referred to in the decision of the European Court. And if anyone asks them to? The Committee of Ministers — the body which monitors the performance of all of the European Court. And Russia will have to answer questions the Committee of Ministers, at their requirements to fulfill this decision, then we'll talk on a new qualitative level.
Vladimir Kara-Murza: Terrorist attack has left a lot of mysteries. What do you think the most important, who do not have the answer yet?
Elena Milashina: In this particular situation I have many times responded to this question in your air, when we dealt with the other acts of terrorism and the «Nord-Ost». Recently was the anniversary. I still think that it is not secret, hidden history, and the darkness of time — it's secret, private power, of course. I am interested in a very primitive question: who was a member of the operational headquarters for the operation of power management, who took the decision to use gas, who is the chemist who invented the formula of the gas. What is the formula of gas than the hunted people, because people continue to live and suffer from the effects of poison, which they have undergone. Because they are not treated so far. 9 years later is still a huge health implications of the former hostages, and no one knows, in fact, and what is their ease. Many thanks to the Strasbourg court, if at all compressed, just say in Russian, he said he would not have prevented the attack, used the storm, they decided to attack, not before the end of exhausting negotiations, poison people and not saved. Need to know who is responsible for this. Because once again to address the Strasbourg Court, all documents, which revealed that the proceedings should be quite clear that the same situation that repeats itself is reproduced in subsequent terrorist attacks in Beslan, in particular. There is the operational headquarters and its members, who would not have, because all one way or another gave evidence in the case, and all would not have a responsibility, not informed, do not know. And someone out there is a group of people who decide to essentially kill the people put at risk to die more than 900 people. All they say — a brilliant operation, the assault. A brilliant operation, we mean «alfovtsev» who jumped into this room, shoot all the terrorists. Guys and rescue operation, in Strasbourg decision clearly written, was not prepared, not good, no one thought about it. Prepared by surgeons in hospitals, they waited for the people who will come with firearms or be with wounds from the explosion with injuries, there was not a toxicologist. Lots of things, in fact the doctors did not know what, some gas, either during or before the storm, well, secret, nor during the storm, well, secret, or after the storm, when all the terrorists eliminated, well, secret. So far we know nothing, the state is still hiding the formula of the gas. It is what is going again this poison gas? This is fundamentally important to know me. So I do not have any secrets about why the attack could ever take place in Moscow this kind, and who is responsible for this. I need to know who decided to attack those who took the decision to the gas I want this man sat in the dock.
Vladimir Kara-Murza: Please name some of the questions from the list that you and Karina Akopovnoy prepared for the investigation.
Svetlana Gubareva: First, I want to say: For example, I do not care about gas formula, I'm not a chemist, and the formula for gas is nothing in my knowledge will not add. And here is how this affects gas, what are the implications of how to save people, to conduct intoxication — that's what interests me. New issues in fact turned out a little because I did not get over all these 8 years, 8 months, as we waited for the court to answer the questions already. I do not know the circumstances of the death of my loved ones, tried to save them, not attempted, something done. By the way, I tried to figure out why my family had died, showed the expert's experts. It so happened that this expert was studying with people, talked with the people who signed the opinion. And you should have seen his face when he was turning over copies of the papers said, my God, how could they sign it? Here lies, untruth here. They already have lost the conscience?
Vladimir Kara-Murza: What question would you consider most important from those that are still unanswered?
Karina Moskalenko: You know, I share the position of my principals, who have listed these questions would add a question lawyer protsessualista why destroy all the terrorists? During the war, even took the «language» to something he said. It's so important, it would be one to judge, it would be with who you ask, would establish the circumstances with whom they made their way to Moscow, as made, and so on and so forth. Someone did not need all that data and destroyed them, even those who were unconscious and could not have interfere with the operation. The question remained about the negotiations. The fact that there were leaders who argued that we do not negotiate. Once the European Court of Justice asked the questions, Russia has begun to answer that no, we negotiated, we did not shirk from this process, after all the negotiating process was carried out, although the lead artists, journalists, artists and so on. But perhaps the most difficult question, how many years I have been in this business, I very much fear that we will never know the answer to this question: why did not the explosion occurred. No courage to break the large and already sleepy people to shoot, of course, a certain courage required to fight with those who have yet to fall asleep and has actively resisted, but to shoot the sleeping people no valor was not sure. But those who resisted, because they had all the possibilities, according to government figures, that would be an explosion, they had every opportunity to give the command, click on something to pull on something, it needs to seconds, and they firing tens of minutes and no explosion occurred. I somehow think that the government is very worried that no one has ever asked this question and makes every effort to answer this question, never did. Dmitry said — it's not instantaneous gas, it felt, he was seen. That is set in motion this infernal machine had more time than enough. That has not happened and probably knew in advance that this would not happen. But to ask this question today, no one, because the power will not answer, do not want to answer and scared to answer this question, and those who could answer this question, all were killed, allegedly all. We dug with Dimitri and found that not all were killed, at least in the corpses not all, there are people who are gone. Now it was on our statement in the committee of inquiry that the circumstances of these were tested, among the dead there is no specific people whom we know by name. Issues very much. The main puzzling question, which I fear will not be answered now — it's a question, why did not the explosion occurred. Just not by the actions of Russian authorities, and in spite of them, because they have their assault in some degree, and provoked the explosion. Perhaps they did not like it but they actually provoked objectively.
Dmitry Milovidov: Let me remind you of the material things that consoles were not running, the battery remained in the pockets of some of the charges had not been inserted into detonators. Many are mysteries. But in this case, when we ask questions, we simply rascal. Remember the interview with the head of special forces. When an interviewer asks him, why kill all the terrorists, he says, and you do not feel sorry for the terrorists. Excuse me, given the specific question: why not take a «language»? We can not be right to ask this question, we understand, the guys went to their death, they did not know the complete information, that there in the hall. I was a radio engineer, I understand, their technical capabilities are very large, but still remains a big question of uncertainty. We also remember that nine commandos ease gas. But for some reason they were taken in the poison control center, and our relatives have cast on the bus and hid almost from the cameras of the media that there were no problems. Why did this happen? President Putin says it is easy to criticize those who carried out the rescue of the hostages. Excuse me, Mr. President, Special Forces soldiers to kowtow, but to you in the first place, as the older, first question: why this was done, why it was done this way?
Vladimir Kara-Murza: Listening question Muscovite Alla Pavlova.
Listener: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. No one was punished, but many received medals and the title characters of these crimes. And it's Beslan and the «Nord-Ost», before the explosions of houses, teaching in Ryazan — all links in a chain, it is a crime of power. And this power is again broken. Is that possible? In a civilized country could this be?
Vladimir Kara-Murza: What are the facts you alarmed at the official version of events in the Nord-Ost? In particular, what happened, as Karina Akopovna said some terrorists?
Elena Milashina: Well, the situation with the investigation that preceded the terrorist attack, why it became possible, the taking of hostages in Moscow, why was a closed trial of a man who was accused of collaboration with terrorists? Victims do not even recognize they were not given the status of the victims, they are simply not allowed into the court hearing, although it was a matter of «Nord-Ost», only a dedicated, concerned directly tragedy. Why the secret decrees awarded such people as the deputy director of the FSB Pronichev, Tikhonov. Why do not the authorities consider it necessary that the people may, citizens of Russia can point it at her mistakes and even crimes, and to demand an investigation of these crimes. Why she chooses not to learn and not to recognize the facts, and repeat the same mistakes. Because exactly the same situation happened, even worse, in Beslan. Many questions, but in fact he was alone and very clearly reflected in the Strasbourg decision. Because there is our right to know the truth, for a normal investigation, an objective investigation of all circumstances of attack, because we have the right to ask questions, people who have suffered in the attack, and get satisfactory answers, it is violated. And Strasbourg equated these decisions to violate the right to life. This is very serious. That is something that is not an investigation of the «Nord-Ost», violated our right to life — it may actually be the most important meaning of this decision. This gives a tremendous opportunity, «Nord-Ost», which the company must maintain, because people do not fight for themselves. And when you gone in the direction of the conversation about what compensation they will receive much — little is actually the death of their loved ones. No compensation in the case. You should not let yourself think about it, because you have to keep these people, because it's for you, they are fighting. And if the Russian Federation, rather it will be so, because if comes to power all the same clique of security officers, who decide on the force and do not want to then have to answer to society, no matter how many people were killed when they come to power, this situation will be repeated and repeated in the long run. They have no pity. So keep and remember Beslan, the «Nord-Ost», the apartment bombings in Moscow and Volgodonsk on, on Kizlyar on Buinaksk. Do not forget about it.
Vladimir Kara-Murza: Do you feel that you represent the interests of all Russians, and in turn you feel their support in your struggle for the rights of victims?
Svetlana Gubareva: You know, there was a large number of people who understand why I do it, why I do it, there were opponents. For some reason, the first question the opponents was: why do not you blame the terrorists? I would be happy to blame, I would be happy to ask if I have submitted at least one terrorist, and terrorists have survived. I once again say this because I personally saw with my own eyes in the hall, 23 women, suicide, officially killed 19. Where are the four? They go somewhere, they may kill someone else? Why they are not looking for power?
Dmitry Milovidov: After such a declaration Svetlana add almost nothing. During the time after the «Nord-Ost», many have admitted, for example, Patrushev shortly before his resignation, admitted that yes, the «Nord-Ost» mistakes were made. The former Ministry of Internal Affairs, Mr. Vasiliev statsekretar so-called «talking head», admitted that the assault was not brilliant, just as many people died, but the blame has passed for physicians. Such defamation is typical of many medical officials. The case file shows that he dropped dead on his hands and forced to make a miracle or a sign of their death. Because we find in the record the amazing evidence that the number of deaths in hospitals are not the same as the total number of victims. What could it be? The investigation did not wish to answer us this question. We thought that during the trial, we explain what we consider wrong. The prosecutor's office did not want to even respond to simple arithmetic question, how many people died.
Vladimir Kara-Murza: Do you think that the number of victims is underestimated?
Karina Moskalenko: This leads us to a very simple calculation. We calculated the consequences of the decision, where people were killed, in what quantities, and have laid down their number, which struck us. 174 — this is the minimum because we are in this petition is also reflected those hospitals that are not included in the decree, and therefore it is not just a minimum, and just less than the actual killing. How could it happen, who was able to hide this information? Why are these people who were at play, were not in demand. This is all the puzzles, it's a series of mysteries that are still unanswered. We walk through the courts, and it is a shame that the government has forced the victims of the attack to go to court and seek months of investigative documents. For example, we challenged the decision not to institute criminal proceedings against members who carried out this operation, which the European Court said that it was a violation of the right to life, or for improperly planned activity of physicians, challenging these rulings, we did not manage to get even text of this decision. The investigator brought the first and last sheet, shown in court and fled. And a few courts, a few months, and in some cases more than a year has passed, Bureau of the Moscow City Court was forced to cancel such decisions. I remember even today particularly remember the day I got the solution finally, I remember with great gratitude Anna Politkovskaya, who was with us some of the courts, and other journalists who monitored the process and publish a time when many were afraid to even mention this process. And they cite the judge yells at Igor Finagenova parents, who died in this tragedy: what do you want? Formulate your requirements. Constitutional rights, which violated? We tell you how — it's right to life, right to know information. «You do not understand». The elderly, it is now one of the parents Igor Finagenova dead. I'm so ashamed in front of them, they saw what the Russian court at the end of life, they were all for the first time in his life in court, and on them, on the victims cried the judge, a young woman screaming hysterically. All of this was documented by journalists. You know, now that I think that if the investigation fails to open a criminal case will again go to the courts, I think only about how to protect my principals from crying, from the rudeness of nekvalifitsirovannosti of doing business. Moreover, our lawyers also pursued in respect of me taken out private definition to apply to my discipline, I was intimidated. If it were not for Paul Finagenov, which overturned the decision of the cassation instance, I could not participate in it, and my punishment. I say you're my lawyer ended up. My principal, but you're my lawyer. This re-imagine a situation — no. We are now, if the government will balk if she will not perform the legal requirements of the victim if she would hide again the data from the injured party, we immediately have the hands of the decision procedure for the Cabinet Council of Europe — a Department for Implementation of the European Court. The Council of Europe finally realized that you can not give the States to pay off compensation — it's not even in terms of individual measures, if not to speak of the general measures. Even with regard to measures of individual character, for reviewing the cases, criminal cases, if required, all that is required in order to eliminate the violations, which are set by the European Court, otherwise it becomes a form of mockery governments of international justice.
Dmitry Milovidov: We as citizens can not simply make Russian justice machine work the way it must work. But, again, as ordinary citizens are obliged to make. And we hope that the decision in Strasbourg us help you.
Vladimir Kara-Murza: We hear a question from the Nizhny Novgorod region of Vladimir listener.
Listener: Good evening. Lord, but I think this situation: the leader of our rating drops dramatically, and if he will not be president, he will have to answer for everything. So I think in some Uryupinsk in March, still jerk to him to be on a horse and go freely, to become president. What do you think?
Vladimir Kara-Murza: What tactics conduct a national leader in the critical moments?
Elena Milashina: You know, a decision it will be important, why do I say that it is important not only for those who waited many years of justice and justice done. Yes, not in Russia, but nevertheless, it is really very important when talking to black black to white — white, when they say that the gas was toxic gas killed and people are not saved from the effects of this gas. This is very important indeed, because then the soul is soothed. Can not hear a lie for many years, can not be one cemetery, where the state you with your loved ones dead, you, the former hostage, is no longer perceived as a citizen with rights. This decision is very important from another point of view — strategic, I would say. Because it is really a lot of questions after each attack, the men left. Questions actually really delicate and sensitive for the authorities: that government involvement and the extent of their participation in each attack. These questions arise, of course, about the apartment bombings in Moscow and Ryazan same doctrine, which are referred to one of the audience — it does not resolve the situation. How, what were their teachings, why at the moment than to resolve the situation. We caught it in time for the little people's hand, but still no answers to these questions and these questions are serious, you should answer. «Nord-Ost», I say again, how could it happen that in the center of Moscow is a large group of people with such a quantity of arms calmly drove, took over in downtown Moscow theater building with hostages. How could it happen that in Volgodonsk was a machine with lots of explosives and blew up, and, in fact, as — is known to have missed for bribes, forged passports to terrorists drove through the police cordon and detonated. But for some reason there were no consequences for these policemen? In Beslan, the same story. So many questions about how our security services have acted to prevent terrorist attacks, was information about the impending attack, did not do anything as a result of prevention. But every time when the attacks occurred, you will remember what happened in the country with its political freedoms, democratic rights with men. After the apartment bombings in Moscow, the second Chechen campaign, which brought to power of Vladimir Putin. After the «Nord-Ost» was practically destroyed and finished off the freedom of speech in the country, NTV, in particular, there were laws on the new terrorism. After Beslan, were abolished gubernatorial elections, was the strengthening of the repressive legislation and likened to terrorists, even the extremists say, people who tried to criticize the government. Each attack brought dividends government, it can not be denied — it's the facts. So, of course, now people have a right, power, they gave it right and every reason to suspect the very worst crimes against citizens. People are afraid of, really. I think about it, that in a situation where the government feels cornered, it may take. This assumption, again I say, it is because the behavior of government, which sees no need to report, does not consider it necessary to answer people's questions and do not accept people as people, it takes, apparently, we as slaves, as mean-spirited folk in times of absolute power Catherine the Great. But we are not the peasants, who were then, we do not mean-spirited people, we are people who are giving someone the right to make decisions, and we want to ask for the decisions that are accepted if they lead to the death of its citizens.
Vladimir Kara-Murza: To what further steps the victims opened the door of the Strasbourg court's verdict?
Svetlana Gubareva: We had one more chance yet to learn the truth. The truth need not only to us, the victims' families, I think this really necessary and the whole society. It is true that those who are heroes who have made such a brilliant operation, when a brilliant operation, if the heroes, let us know them in person. It must be true about how people were killed, who was responsible for the specific person, not generalities, but specific individuals. And be sure punishment for these individuals. I hope so. I wish that people were not indifferent. I live in Kazakhstan, my daughter and I lived in Kazakhstan, the husband lived in America. And we did not even occur to come, that he met in Moscow, arriving there a week, we plunge to the rest of your life. I want to make everyone else understand that they can just plunge into such a story. And we must join forces to such stories simply did not exist. Defeating terrorism can only be united.
Dmitry Milovidov: I remember very well how strangers came to the cemetery and told us what will happen to our children in the same situation? I remember other words: this is not the old days, you should understand.
Vladimir Kara-Murza: What could be more procedural steps for the losing side?
Karina Moskalenko: general government may appeal the decision, they may file an appeal to refer the case to the Grand Chamber, the only Grand Chamber might reconsider that decision. But here, listening to stories about the brilliant operations of that decision-balanced, it is really balanced, that it is positive, authorities alleged there is not so represented them as to what actually were. I think that if the authorities do not intend to appeal this case, the procedural steps necessary to start today, why do we actually have thought through with Svetlana and text applications. Let the government proves that it disagrees with the decision and spends what it takes to implement this decision. Generally, first of all, thank you for today's transfer, thanks to everyone who was not calm, and everyone who helped us, just Russian citizens who sympathized. Radio Liberty © 2011 RFE / RL, Inc. | All rights reserved. Vladimir Kara-Murza
Svoboda News
21.12.2011 21:00 http://www.svobodanews.ru/articleprintview/24429050.html
Views: 10879 | E-mail
|
- Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
- Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
- Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
- Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
- Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
|
Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.6
AkoComment © Copyright 2004 by Arthur Konze — www.mamboportal.com
All right reserved |
Comments (1)
