Kungaev family's advocate to lodge another complaint against Budanov's release

Today, Stanislav Markelov, advocate of the Kungaev family, plans to send a repeated complaint to the Ulyanovsk Regional Court with a demand to cancel the decision of the Dimitrovgrad District Court on Yuri Budanov's conditional early relief (CER). Mr Markelov told the "Caucasian Knot" correspondent about it.

"My first brief complaint was lodged to the Ulyanovsk Regional Court before the New Year. Then, upon my request, I received the full text of the decision of the Dimitrovgrad Court of December 24; they asked me to draft a full text of the cassation complaint based thereon. I was to send it out before January 16. In spite of that, Budanov was set free on January 15, and in response to my complaint a paper was faxed to me from the Ulyanovsk Regional Court, which is an incredible circumstance by itself. That fax message contained a reference to the decision of the Constitutional Court of 2006, which had obviously nothing to do with this case. It referred to the episode, when the victim doubted that Budanov would pay the compensation sum, and on the basis demanded his participation in consideration of the case about the CER," said Stanislav Markelov.

That decision of 2006 ran that the decision of the court on the conditional early relief did not exempt the convict from the duty to pay material compensation; and when considering the CER issue, the participation of the victim party was not required.

"This decision has nothing to do to the actual cassation complaint: the victims in this case did not demand any material compensation and participation in litigation on the CER issue; they had just appealed against the decision," Mr Markelov has explained, having treated these circumstances of the case as "absurd".

"Already on January 15 in the afternoon, I telephoned to the Dimitrovgrad Court, where they told me that the Court had not sent the decision on Budanov's CER of December 24 to the colony, where he was serving his term. They told me at the Court that they knew nothing about Budanov's release and that I should send a full copy of the decision of the Ulyanovsk Regional Court; and I did at about 1 p.m.," the lawyer has added.

As to the new Budanov's crimes, of which he is accused by residents of the Shatoy and Urus-Martan Districts of the Chechen Republic, according to the statement of Chechen Ombudsman Nurdi Nukhazhiev, Stanislav Markelov had said that "he knew about these crimes 10 years ago."

"When the materials on Kungaeva's murder were considered on the merits, facts were already available that Budavon had committed crimes not in relation to her only. However then, on my recommendation, with which the victim party had agreed, we made a decision to strive for the verdict of guilty at least on that episode: it had the most developed evidences, and the victim party was resolutely going to reach justice," the lawyer explained to the "Caucasian Knot" correspondent.

"Currently, Chechnya holds a pre-inquiry check of these facts. As a matter of fact, they are especially grave criminal offences against the person and are punishable by up to 15 years of imprisonment; and Budanov has not served this term. The decision on initiating criminal cases is in the competence of the prosecutor's office," Mr Markelov has added.

He has also emphasized: "Budanov's case is a symbol. If his release is recognized lawful, and he is not criminally prosecuted in future, it will indicate that political factors have interfered in the criminal process."

"I'm going to lodge a complaint to the Ulyanovsk Court against the illegal decision to reject my appeal against on Monday, January 19," Mr Markelov has reported.

Should the complaint be rejected by the Ulyanovsk Court, he plans to address the Supreme Court.

"The decision on his release is absolutely illegal. Should the victim party have had no right of appeal, Budanov would have been released 10 days after the decision. The decision was passed on December 24. Thus, on January 3 he would have been at large. Since my complaint was accepted, it means that the victim party had the right of appeal against this decision," Mr Markelov has reminded.

"If Budanov's release is recognized to be illegal, the persons who had passed it should incur criminal liability. However, since the intentions of the Court varied radically - first they appointed the cassation term till January 16, and then released Budanov the day before; I think the District Court received a command from above. The customers should be made responsible," said the advocate for the Kungaev family.