Public Defender Asida Shakryl issued a statement calling on the General Prosecutor’s Office to media fact-check the statements of the officials on the Hadzharat Tarsman’s case for violations of Article 288 of the RA Criminal Code "Abuse of power”, and to take all the necessary actions to refute the previously announced false information.

Several senior law enforcement officials, including the Minister of the Interior, Garry Arshba, and Acting Assistant to the RA Prosecutor General, Daur Amichba, made public statements prior to the court's decision, which contained preliminary assessments of Tarsman K.Z.'s culpability in a road accident, in which Prime Minister Gennady Gagulia was killed. 

A. Shakryl urges the implementation of criminal procedure for Tarsman’s case, as well as for other cases, in strict accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Abkhazia and internationally accepted standards.

“We urge prosecution authorities to monitor the strict observance of the presumption of innocence throughout the entire criminal procedure, and in cases of violation of this fundamental principle, to respond promptly in a manner prescribed by law,” the Ombudsman also states.

*** STATEMENT BY THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF THE REPUBLIC OF ABKHAZIA

“The Ombudsman’s office repeatedly receives messages in connection with the investigation of a prominent traffic accident. On September 8, 2018, on the Psou-Ingur highway, a VAZ-2199 car, driven by Tarsman K.Z., collided with a Toyota Camry car, which belonged to the Cabinet of Ministers of the RA, resulting in the death of The Prime Minister of the Republic, Gennady Leonidovich Gagulia.”

Several senior law enforcement officials made public statements prior to the court's decision, which contained preliminary assessments of Tarsman Kh.Z.'s culpability in the traffic accident. 

The Ombudsman is concerned with the prejudicial statements made by officials in the media since they indicate a clear violation of the legal principle of presumption of innocence, which is designed to guarantee the right to a fair hearing.

On the next day after the fatal accident(September 9), the Minister of the Interior, Arshba Garry Anatolyevich, declared during a briefing, that citizen Tarsman H.Z. collided with the motor vehicle of the Prime Minister while in a state of drug intoxication. On the same day, an article was published on the Sputnik Abkhazia website, claiming (with reference to the acting Assistant of the Attorney General, Amichba Daur Feodorovich) that “the driver Tarsman Kh.Z. was under the influence of drugs”. Further, on September 12, 2018, in the television release of “Time of the News" on the channel "Abaza TV”, the acting Assistant of the Attorney General Amichba gave an interview on the subject of the ongoing investigation, where he announced that citizen Tarsman H.Z. partially admitted to his guilt. And finally, on September 21, 2018, Deputy Prosecutor General Eshsou Ivanovich Kakalia in an interview with the Abkhazian television reported that, according to the examination carried out at the time of the accident, Tarsman K.Z. was not in a state of drug intoxication, thus actually proving false the above statements by the Minister of Internal Affairs and acting Assistant of the Attorney General.

The Ombudsman stresses that public announcements made by state officials on the 9 and the 12 of September were utterly accusatory. The information released by representatives of the State required additional study and verification.

Statements by public authorities on September 9 and 12 violate Article 22 of the RA Constitution (“A person shall be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to the procedure established by law and declared guilty by an effective court judgment”) and also contradict international standards enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (clause 1 of article 11), in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (clause 2 of article 14), in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (clause 2 of article 6).

Based on the above international documents, The European Commission on Human Rights notes that authorities are prohibited from referring to suspects or accused persons as being guilty before the trial. This provision also applies to public prosecutors. At the same time, the Commissioner states that authorities can and should inform the public on criminal investigations in progress, or if the accused would admit to a crime. But in making such statements, they are obliged to clarify that the suspect is presumed innocent until the court ruling.

The violation of rights of the citizen Tarsman K.Z. lies in the non-compliance with this fundamental provision both by Minister of Internal Affairs G.A. Arshba, and by acting Assistant Prosecutor General Amichba D.F. Statements by public officials on 9 and 12 September encourage the public to believe the suspect guilty and prejudge the assessment of the facts by the competent judicial authority, thus undermining a fair trial. When expressing the official position of the State agencies and the State as a whole, public authorities are obliged to comply with the principle of presumption of innocence, and not to voice an opinion on the suspect’s guilt before the entry in force of the court’s decision.

Given the foregoing and to ensure compliance with human rights and freedoms, the Commissioner urged the Attorney General's Office to media fact-check the statements of the officials for the case of Tarsman H.Z. for violation of the norms of Article 288 of the RA Criminal Code – “Abuse of power”, and to take all the necessary measures to refute the previously announced false information. The commissioner demanded the implementation of criminal procedure for Tarsman’s case, as well as for other cases, in strict accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Abkhazia and internationally accepted standards.

The Ombudsman addressed the prosecution authorities with the recommendation to monitor the strict observance of the presumption of innocence throughout the entire criminal process, and in cases of violation of this fundamental principle, to respond promptly in the manner prescribed by law.