Deportations from the Crimea.
The ‘temporary measures’ recommended in Resolution No. 700 of the USSR Council of Ministers (15 August 1978), continue to be enforced: the police are evicting unregistered Crimean Tatars from the homes they have bought and are forcibly ‘removing’ them from the Crimea. More detailed information is available about only some of these actions.
*
On 20 August 1979, Ibraim Asanov was deported from Belogorsk, followed by Riza Osmanov on 23 August. On 25 August a detachment of 200 men deported the family of Izzet Mustafyev from Stary Krym. On 26 September the Pashala family (CCE 37.6) was deported from the village of Zolotoye Pole (Kirov district).
On the same day two families were deported from the village of Krasnoye in the Saki district. One of those evicted, Asan Kosse was not given his car back. Asan Kosse participated in the mass journey of Crimean Tatars to Moscow in January-February 1979 (CCE 52.9-2) and was one of a group of delegates representing war veterans.
On 20 October 1979 the Ametosmanov family was deported from Stary Krym. It is also known that six or seven families have been deported from the village of Batalnoye, Lenin district.
*
The Case of Reshat Dzhemilev
In Tashkent the investigation is still proceeding in the case of Reshat Dzhemilev, who was arrested on 4 April (CCE 53.22-1) and charged under Article 190-1 (RSFSR Criminal Code) and its equivalent, Article 191-4 in the Uzbek Code.
On 6 April 1979, R. Dzhemilev protested to the Procurator of Tashkent against his illegal arrest and the fact that he had been taken away under the eyes of his dying mother; he asked that Investigator F. Kh. Mustayev be removed from the case. He also issued a declaration asking that he be released on parole to attend his mother’s funeral. From the start of the investigation R. Dzhemilev had been demanding an end to the case or, if this was refused, the inclusion in the case of all the documents confiscated from him and the summoning as witnesses of people listed in the documents as victims. He handed in this request even after he was told that the investigation had been concluded (10 July). On 11 July Investigator Mustayev issued a ‘Resolution denying the accused’s request’:
‘… The accused R, Dzhemilev requested that the documents entitled ‘Events in the Crimea’, ‘Trial of Mustafa Dzhemilev in Omsk’ and ‘The Self-immolation of Musa Mamut in the Crimea’ should be included in the case evidence, as he considers them relevant to the case.
‘During the pre-trial investigation these materials were examined. The documents describe events which have no connection with the charges against the accused R. Dzhemilev and many of them have been composed without indicating definite sources which could confirm the events described in the documents. After taking this into account, and in view of the fact that these documents are not for public distribution, a case resolution was passed and it was decided to destroy them.’
‘The accused Dzhemilev further requested that he should be allowed to confront witnesses listed in the documents confiscated in connection with the case. During the pre-trial investigation the accused Reshat Dzhemilev refused to give evidence, alleging that the investigation was not being conducted objectively and was unlawful: as a result there is no contradiction between the evidence given by witnesses and that of R. Dzhemilev himself and there are no legal grounds fora confrontation between the two.’
By means of the same resolution, the Investigator refused Dzhemilev a meeting with his wife to agree on their choice of a lawyer, as such a ‘meeting between them could result in a leakage of information about a criminal case’. (CCE 53.22-1 reported how Zera Dzhemileva was forbidden to fly to Moscow in search of a lawyer.)
On 30 July, without Dzhemilev being given an opportunity to study the case evidence of the pre-trial investigation, an indictment was drawn up by the Procurator and the case was sent to the City Court.
*
On 7 August the first hearing of the case was held, with Judge A. I. Lipatov presiding. R. Dzhemilev’s relatives had not been officially informed of the date of the trial, but they nevertheless arrived at the court-house, together with a few other people. Dzhemilev’s wife and his middle son Nariman were not allowed into the trial, the others were simply not allowed inside, but three of them literally broke through into the courtroom after the hearing had already begun.
In court it turned out that the defence counsel was not acquainted with the case. R. Dzhemilev, in a detailed speech, described the unending violations of legality in the cases of people involved in the Crimean Tatar movement and challenged the composition of the court. The Judge said that if the accused went on insulting the Soviet court, he would be removed and the case would be heard in his absence.
After the interval the Judge stated that the hearing would be postponed, as ‘all the witnesses have not turned up at the trial’. Without giving a precise date, he said that the court would need two or three days to take measures ensuring the presence of the witnesses’. After the hearing Lipatov promised the relatives that he would inform them when the trial was due to recommence.
In an appeal to the Chairman of the Tashkent City Court, S. S. Salimov, dated 18 September, R. Dzhemilev writes:
After an interval of 20 days the court resumed its activity on 27 August, without any of my family or relatives being present in the courtroom, and investigated my complaint (sent back from the USSR Procuracy) describing the violation of legal and judicial norms throughout the pre-trial investigation by the investigation agencies. The court, calling this complaint of mine a ‘request’ to the court, ‘decided’ to send it off for further investigation by the Procuracy.
Now, after this — i.e., after 27 August — any hopes I may have had of further moves in my ‘case’ have been put off for a fourth week. For a fourth week I find myself in an unresolved situation and I don’t know how long this is likely to continue.
In the same appeal he reports that his chronic ill-health has become much worse, due to a post-operative rupture which gives him sharp pains in the stomach.
I need examination and treatment by a doctor in hospital, but the prison doctor refuses to allow this and won’t send me to a hospital, because he says my treatment depends on those who are in charge of me.
In September Nariman Dzhemilev and his friend Reshat Ablayev began to receive threats of prosecution under the same Article 191-4 of the Uzbek SSR Criminal Code.
They were told that they were under suspicion of collecting signatures for a protest against the sentencing of Mustafa Dzhemilev and of distributing leaflets for the 35th anniversary of the deportation of the Crimean Tatars (CCE 53.22-1). A great many students at Tashkent University were questioned about the latter episode; they were shown photographs for the purpose of identification.
===========================================
A Chronicle of Current Events 