THE PERSECUTION OF WELL-KNOWN OPPOSITIONIST TOFIQ YAQUBLU HAS BEEN CONTINUING
Tofiq Yaqublu
Analysis of violation of law during Tofiq Yaqublu’s judicial proceedings
Baku City Sabayil District Court
Case №3(009)-2047/2022
23 December 2022
Presiding judge: Madina Bagirova
The person against whom an administrative record was issued: Tofiq Yaqublu
Defenders: Nemat Karimli, Zakir Kazimov
The administrative protocol was drawn up by Akif Askarov, the Sabayil District Police Chief at the Police Directorate No. 8
Tofig Yaqublu, a well-known member of the opposition Party “Musavat” and a member of the National Democratic Forces Union, is one of the bright figures who has been an active participant in the political and public life of Azerbaijan for many years. From 1992 to 1993, Tofig Yaqublu held the position of the Chief Deputy of Binagadi district executive power in Baku, and since 1993 he has been a member of “Musavat” Party. One of the most well-known fighters against the dictatorship of I.Aliyev.
In 1998, he got a conditional sentence on a fabricated criminal case and deprived of liberty for 2 years.
In 2013, he was arrested under the Articles “Participation and organization of riots” and “Resisting a police officer” during the protests against the I. Aliyev policy in the Ismailli district where T.Yaqublu went as an observer. On these charges he was sentenced to five years in jail. While in prison, he got the news of the sudden death of his 26-year-old daughter, Nargiz Yaqublu, who was also a political and social activist, a member of the “Musavat” Party. In 2016, T.Yaqublu was prematurely released.
The third criminal case against him was initiated in March, 2020. It was a case of fabricated charges such as “hooliganism”. On 3 September 2020, the Nizami District Court of Baku found Tofig Yaqublu guilty of the charges and sentenced him to 4 years and 3 months imprisonment. In a protest, Yaqublu announced a hunger strike right in the courtroom. And his health condition sharply deteriorated. He was then placed in the intensive care unit. On 18 September 2020, Yaqublu was released from detention upon the decision of the Court of Appeal that replaced his imprisonment on the word parole.
Besides the above criminal cases, T. Yaqublu has over 30 administrative detentions.
On 23 December 2022, at the Fountain Square in the center of Baku, it was organized a rally against the arrest of the public activist Bakhtiyar Hajiyev, in respect of whom it had been opened a criminal case. Currently, B.Hajiyev is on hunger strike. T.Yaqublu along with other participants of the peaceful rally demanded Bakhtiyar Hajiyev’s release. In the course of the action T.Yaqublu was detained by the police, put into a police car and taken away.
Tofiq Yaqublu was charged with administrative offence under the Articles 510 (Failure to obey the legitimate demands of a policeman) and 535.1 (Disorderly Conduct) of the Administrative Offences Code of the Azerbaijan Republic.
At the trial, Tofig Yaqublu pleaded not guilty and testified that on 23 December 2022, he was giving an interview to the reporters at Fountain Square when the police officers with covered faces grabbed him, forcibly put him into a car and took him away. He also testified that he had not insulted anyone, had not used obscene language, and had not resisted the police officers. He believes that all of this is a lie, and the administrative case should be terminated.
At the trial, Akif Askarov, a police major, the Police Chief of the 8th Department Sabayil District Police was questioned and testified similarly to the report he had previously drawn up.
Also, at the course of trial, Emil Qasymov, a police sergeant and Vusal Salmanov, a senior sergeant of the Sabayil District Police Department were questioned as witnesses, and they both confirmed the version of the investigation.
On 23 December 2022, the Baku Sabayil District Court issued a verdict : to convict Tofig Yaqublu for administrative offenses under the Articles 510 and 535.1 of the Administrative Offences Code and sentenced him to 30 days of administrative detention.
T.Yaqublu has been on hunger strike since 5 January 2023. His hunger strike is a protest against the poor nutrition and detention conditions in the detention center for the people offended under administrative procedure. As a result, his health condition has drastically deteriorated. Many political and public activists at the headquarters of “Musavat” Party, as well as Maya Yaqublu, Tofig Yaqublu’s wife, also joined the hunger strike.
Commentary by expert lawyer:
The court verdict is unlawful and unjustified. According to the Article 3.1 of the Code On administrative violations of the Azerbaijan Republic, only such person, who was declared guilty for committing administrative violations under this Code and had performed a deed (action or inaction) having all other signs of an administrative violation, shall be called to account and punished.
The Code On administrative violations of the Azerbaijan Republic likewise any other law lists the principles of the legislation on administrative offences. The most important Principle is the respect of human and civil rights and freedoms.
According to the Article 5 of the Code On administrative violations of the Azerbaijan Republic,
- The rights and freedom of human and citizens are of great value. All the state authorities (officials) having committed violation of these rights and freedom shall be responsible in the order provided by legislation of the Azerbaijan Republic.
- This Code provides prevention by the state authorities (officials) violation of rights and freedoms of human and citizen and respect for these rights and freedoms.
The Principle of Equality before the Law (the Article 7 of the Code On administrative violations of the Azerbaijan Republic) is another important Principle of Administrative Proceedings. The persons who have committed administrative violations are equal before the Law and are called to account regardless of the race, nationality, religion, language, sex, origin, property and official status, believes and other circumstances. No one may be subjected to administrative liability or exempted from administrative liability on the grounds set out in this Article (Article 7.1 of the Code On administrative violations of the Azerbaijan Republic).
According to the Article 75 of the Code On administrative violations of the Azerbaijan Republic, in a case of administrative misconduct, it should be determined:
- the event of an administrative offence (whether an administrative offence has occurred);
- a perpetrator of an administrative offence;
- the circumstances aggravating and mitigating administrative liability;
- the nature and extent of the damage resulting from the administrative offence;
- the guilt of the individual committed an administrative offence;
- circumstances precluding proceedings in cases of administrative offences;
- other relevant circumstances for the appropriate determination of the case as well as the causes and conditions that contributed to the administrative offence commission.
The evidence base, which the investigating body submits to the Court, is of great importance in the cases of this nature. In fact, the evidence must prove whether the person in respect of whom the administrative protocol has been drawn up is really guilty. However, in this case, as well as in the other similar cases, apart from the police testimony, there is no evidentiary basis at all or it consists of inconsistent and partial pieces of evidence. According to the practice of analysis of the trials against politically active members of the society, it has been found the same violations of the substantive and procedural law in almost all cases, and the Articles 510 and 535.1 of the Code are, so to speak, the “favorite” articles under which the political activists have been charged.
As pointed out above, as evidence in this case there were: the administrative report, three policemen’s testimonies, and the detainee’s testimony. In its ruling, the Court summarizes:
“The Court, having heard the testimonies of the parties, and having assessed the totality of the evidence, came to the conclusion that Tofig Yaqublu had committed offences stipulated under the Articles 510 and 535.1 of the Code On administrative violations, therefore an administrative sanction shall be imposed upon him”.
It is not clear why the Court has come to this conclusion, what particular evidences in the case support the Tofig Yaqublu’s guilt, why the police testimonies have been considered irrefutable whereas the testimonies of T.Yaqublu and his defenders have not been taken into account, why the Court has chosen a 30-day-detention instead of a 15-day, for example. All these questions are left unanswered.
In accordance with the Article 76 of the Code On administrative violations of the Azerbaijan Republic, the evidence in a case of administrative misconduct is any factual findings, on the basis of which the Judge, or authorized body (official) establishes the occurrence or lack of administrative offense, guilt of an individual who committed an administrative offence, and other circumstances relevant to the right determination in the case. Such details are ascertained according to real evidence, statements of a person in respect of whom proceedings on administrative misconduct are conducted, victim’s testimony, witnesses, other documents, expert’s opinion, and a protocol on administrative misconduct, as well as other protocols defined in the Code.
In this case, the Court again manifested partiality and bias, as a result of which T. Yaqublu was once again deprived of the right to liberty guaranteed under the Article 28 of the AR Constitution, and Article 5(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. He was unreasonably isolated from the society for 30 days. Not a single rally participant, on December 23, 2022, or a reporter exercising his professional duty at the time were called to testify as witnesses in the case. As mentioned above, the rally had been held at the Fountain Square in the center of Baku, where there were plenty of surveillance cameras, the video of which could have confirmed the innocence of T.Yaqublu. However, the biased consideration of the case led to the violation of fundamental human and civil rights, the Right to Liberty and personal security, the Right to Presumption of Innocence, the Right to freedom of assembly, the Right to Freedom of Speech, the Right to a fair trial and other related rights.