Victim’s failure to appear in court for questioning highlights absurd nature of accusation against Zarema Musaeva
The employee of the Federal Penitentiary Service (known as FSIN), involved as a victim in a case against Zarema Musaeva, has once again failed to appear for questioning in court. He explained the failure to come with his poor health state. The last prosecution witness questioned by the court testified in favour of Zarema Musaeva.
The FSIN employee, involved as a victim in the case against Zarema Musaeva, has once again failed to appear in court for health reasons, advocate Alexander Savin informed the “Caucasian Knot”.
“Today, the Shali City Court resumed the consideration of the criminal case against Zarema Musaeva after a long break. Today, the victim, the FSIN employee who was allegedly attacked by severely ill Zarema Musaeva, was supposed to appear in court, but he was unable to come due to his poor health state,” the defender noted.
Advocate Alexander Savin has also reported that the last prosecution witness was questioned at the today’s court hearing. “This is a woman who was serving her sentence together with Zarema Musaeva in a penal colony-settlement in the city of Argun. The prosecution witness stated that Zarema was not a conflict person and never argued with employees of the penal colony,” the advocate emphasized.
The witness, questioned in court today, did not see the incident by her own eyes, the “Team Against Torture”* informed the “Caucasian Knot”.
“The persons who were earlier serving their sentences together with Zarema Musaeva in the penal colony have been involved in the criminal case as prosecution witnesses. However, they did not see the incident with their own eyes, and they give completely positive characteristics for Zarema Musaeva. That is, their testimonies simply cannot prove the charge with such content, and the court, meanwhile, is obliged to evaluate the available characterizing information regarding the defendant,” noted an activist from the Team Against Torture”*.
The NGO also notes that “if the injuries described in the criminal case had caused harm to the FSIN employee’s health, then Zarema Musaeva’s actions would have been classified under a more serious part of the criminal article.”
The minor nature of the injury – a bruise without need for medical assistance and loss of ability to work – calls into question the very essence of the charge brought against Zarema Musaeva, advocate Timur Filippov suggests.
“In accordance with the law, violence that interferes with the normal operation of the public institution could be in question. It is clear that such ‘injury’ of the warder cannot destabilize the activities of the penal colony. Moreover, the incident allegedly occurred outside the penal colony, during a trip to a hospital, which calls into question the very applicability of Article 321 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Part 2 of Article 321 of the Criminal Code provides for up to five years of imprisonment. In current modern judicial practice, in cases with political background, courts pronounce real terms of imprisonment even for inflicting minor harm. So, there is no hope for leniency of punishment, especially in a public case,” advocate Timur Filippov told the “Caucasian Knot”.
Zarema Musaeva is an elderly woman weakened by severe illnesses, and to assume that she attacked an armed guard during a trip to the hospital is simply absurd, the advocate believes.
“Everything indicates that the new charge is not aimed at establishing the truth, but it is aimed at artificially prolonging the imprisonment of Zarema Musaeva, essentially as a political hostage. Positive characteristics, including the testimony of her cellmate about Zarema Musaeva’s peaceful behaviour, are important for the defence. However, in the current repressive judicial system, they rarely become decisive. In a politically motivated trial and the absence of an unbiased investigation, such evidence is often ignored. The very fact that the charge is based on the words of the ‘victim’ who did not even show up for questioning already looks dubious, but this is an argument for the court in a normal legal reality. The practice of recent years shows that neither public prosecutor nor court will be embarrassed by the victim’s absence from the court hearing, and his testimony may be read out, which the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation allows for,” advocate Timur Filippov explained.
The victim’s conscience, not his poor health state, prevents him from appearing in court, believes Svetlana Gannushkina**, the chair of the “Civic Assistance Committee”***. “Imagine what it’s like for the healthy man to stand and publicly claim that the elderly woman injured him. It’s a disgrace for every man. Especially since there was no injury, it was all made up to prolong her suffering,” the human rights defender told the “Caucasian Knot”.
The Zarema Musaeva’s case fits into a trend of cases on violence used against law enforcers by people whom the authorities consider their enemies, the human rights defender notes.
“The FSIN employee has become a tool in the hands of the Chechen authorities, who use any methods to make everyone who is against them suffer as much as possible. In this case, they are doing that with Zarema Musaeva, using all sorts of falsifications against the elderly woman. This is a real disgrace for all participants in the trial, and although many are forced to participate in it, no one will be able to avoid shame,” Svetlana Gannushkina** noted.
This was originally published on the Russian page of 24/7 Internet agency ‘Caucasian Knot’ on June 24, 2025 at 11:51 pm MSK. To access the full text of the article, click here.
*The “Team Against Torture” (formerly the “Committee Against Torture”) was created by lawyers who previously worked for the “Committee Against Torture” (CaT), which was included in the register of NCOs performing the functions of foreign agents.
**Included by the Russian Ministry of Justice (MoJ) into the register of foreign agents.
***On April 20, 2015, information appeared on the website of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) of the Russian Federation that the “Civic Assistance Committee” was included in the list of foreign agents.