The pre-trial investigation in the case of Valery Maresin, accused of refusing to give evidence as a witness (CCE 38.3) at the trial of S. A. Kovalyov, has ended.
The Lithuanian KGB’s investigative agencies interrogated V. N. Fedorenko, V. S. Malyshev and P. M. Slepov (colleagues of Maresin and Kovalyov), who repeated and supplemented the evidence which they had given at Kovalyov’s trial: the suspicious behaviour of the ‘Kovalyov group’; ‘apolitical conversations; and Maresin’s reading of a typewritten text which he refused to show. Malyshev had informed the administration of what was happening, he testified, but the administration had not reacted to his warning.
The director of the laboratory, Gorbatov, laboratory assistant Chikina and section director Dobrachev repeated their testimony about the circumstances in which the book The Gulag Archipelago had been confiscated.
*
INTERROGATION
From 29 January to 3 February 1976, First Lieutenant I. Rusetsky of the Lithuanian KGB interrogated in Moscow V. Maresin, his wife Tamara Maresina and a former colleague of Maresin, Arie Mizyakin.
While interrogating Tamara Maresina, the interrogator asked her to influence her husband to reveal the owner of the copy of A. Solzhenitsyn’s book that had been confiscated from him. He promised that this admission would save Maresin from unpleasant consequences, and said that otherwise he could be deprived of his master’s degree.
As Arie Mizyakin had done at the pre-trial investigation in Kovalyov’s case, he affirmed at the interrogation that he was familiar with Kovalyov’s letter to Andropov; as previously, however, he refused to say where he had seen the letter, as he considered this question irrelevant to the case.
MARESIN
At the request of the investigator at an interrogation on 2 February 1976, Valery Maresin explained the substance of the moral principles on account of which he had refused to give evidence in court. Once again, he refused to affirm or refute Kovalyov’s statement (in his letter to Andropov) that the confiscated book belonged to him, Kovalyov.
Nonetheless, the investigator asked him: “Will you continue to stick to your moral principles after criminal proceedings have been instituted against you?”
*
FEBRUARY STATEMENTS
SAKHAROV
On 4 February A. D. Sakharov issued a statement:
“… However, he [Maresin, Chronicle] is being questioned not about motives and circumstances for refusing to give evidence, but about the episode of the attempt to duplicate A. Solzhenitsyn’s book The Gulag Archipelago, which incriminated Kovalyov. All the others are being questioned only about Maresin’s case. These new interrogations arouse great alarm.
“Is Maresin really being prepared as a new victim for a show of strength? Of is this yet another attempt to strengthen in advance the precarious case for Kovalyov’s sentence?”
*
MARESIN
On 9 February 1976 in Vilnius, where he had been summoned to acquaint himself with his case, Maresin made a statement to the procurator:
“. . . Having been present at this trial as a witness, I have become firmly convinced that the prosecution of citizens under Articles 70 & 190-1 (RSFSR Criminal Code) represents persecution for beliefs and, consequently, is in contradiction of the [1936] Soviet Constitution.
“I cannot consider the refusal, therefore, of a witness to give evidence at the examination of such cases to be a crime against justice. Thus I cannot plead guilty to committing this crime. At the same time, I recognize that this is my subjective opinion and is in contradiction to juridical practice.
“Having no other means of upholding my point of view, I have decided to dissociate myself entirely from participation in this case . . .”
In accordance with this statement, Maresin refused to sign the protocol on the completion of the pre-trial investigation.
=========================================
A Chronicle of Current Events 