Three years added to the sentence for an unmade bed. A letter to Donetsk prosecutors

In the Donetsk region, “there are many examples where staff of the prosecutor’s office turn a blind eye to human rights violations and the use of torture, and the procedures for investigating reports of torture are ‘very far from European standards’.”
This is stated in an Open Letter from the public historical-educational and human rights charitable organisation “Donetsk Memorial” addressed to the Prosecutor of the Donetsk region.
The letter, timed to coincide with 26 June – the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture – reminds us that “the prosecutor’s office is intended to fight against violations of the law and to protect the rights of citizens”.
“Unfortunately, in our region, this is still often not the case. There are many examples where staff of the prosecutor’s office turn a blind eye to human rights violations and the use of torture. The procedures for investigating reports of torture are very far from European standards,” the Donetsk human rights defenders state.
“For example, back in 2000, police officers burst in the morning into the premises where the minor M. Yevtushin, who was home alone without his parents at the time, was staying, beat him, and only drew up a detention report after 13:00. The parents were not warned about the detention, as required by law. Yevtushin’s mother filed a complaint with the Petrovsky district prosecutor’s office in Donetsk regarding the violation of the law during the detention, but the district prosecutors saw nothing illegal. The court found the prosecutor’s office’s investigation into the complaint regarding the illegal actions of the police officers to be improper and ordered a re-investigation. But the district prosecutor’s office treated the second investigation formally as well. Moreover, this prosecutor’s office did not provide the applicant with the text of the adopted resolution on the re-investigation for almost two years. Did the staff of this prosecutor’s office really care about upholding human rights in this case? And the regional prosecutor’s office treated Yevtushyna’s complaints and the appeals of the non-governmental organisation with indifference, as if there were no violations at all. Now the court has returned the mother’s complaint for investigation for a second time,” the letter to the prosecutor reports.
Human rights defenders remind the regional prosecutor about another “unfortunate incident”.
“At the beginning of 2008, our organisation (‘Donetsk Memorial’ – Ed.) appealed to the regional prosecutor’s office regarding suspected torture by electric shock of citizen V. at the Volnovakha district police station. The district prosecutor’s office effectively did not investigate the lawyer’s complaint, and the regional prosecutor’s office twice provided us with a formal dismissal, stating that everything was correct. At the same time, European standards stipulate that a thorough investigation into such reports must be conducted. Unfortunately, the responses from both the district prosecutor’s office and the regional prosecutor’s office do not inspire confidence,” the letter notes.
In their letter to the prosecutor, the Donetsk human rights defenders also point out that they are “currently following developments closely regarding the circumstances of the recent detention of citizen R. on 13 June of this year by the Kyivsky district police station, involving his suspected beating and illegal detention.”
“Separately, it is necessary to speak about the support provided by prosecutors in court for the prosecution of convicted persons who are serving sentences in places of deprivation of liberty and are accused of violating the regime under Article 391 of the Criminal Code. Prosecutors sometimes do not see the absurdity of the prosecution’s arguments when, for example, a convict’s bed not made ‘to the standard’ or his refusal to clean the premises are assessed by prosecutors as the final straw sufficient to extend a sentence by three years. Does the position of the prosecutors meet human rights standards and the proportionality of the violation? After all, if the code contains absurd norms, should absurd prosecutors insist on their compliance?”, the letter emphasises.
The Donetsk human rights defenders also provide their phone numbers to the prosecutor and note that they “would be sincerely grateful” for a statement of his position “regarding the mentioned issues and specific examples”.