|
Crimes of War Project: Special Edition on Chechnya
Background
and New Feed of the Day(Editorial Follows the Background Information and New Feed) FIGHT FOR INDEPENDENCE FROM RUSSIA
A boy touches a fence in
a school in the Chechen town of Argun, 15 km (9.3 miles) from the capital Grozny, 2006. Tsarnayev Chechen separatists have been fighting for autonomy since the break-up of
the Soviet Union, but the armed conflict has largely subsided, and Chechnya remains a republic within the Moscow-dominated
Russian Federation. Chechnya is on the edge of Russia's sphere
of influence - the North Caucasus republic lies between the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea - but Moscow is unwilling to let
go. The rebels are seeking to form a viable independent republic
in a region that is culturally different from Russia, with its own language, and where most people are Muslim, unlike the
traditionally Orthodox Russians. Chechens claimed independence in
1991, and at first Moscow left the situation alone. When it sent in troops to suppress the rebellion in 1994, they suffered
surprising and humiliating losses, and withdrew in 1996 after two years of fighting. Open conflict started up again in 1999.
Aslan Maskhadov, who led the rebels during the 1994-1996 war, was
elected Chechen president in 1997. Russia initially recognised the government, and a peace agreement was reached. It granted
the region substantial autonomy but stopped short of full independence, so it soon broke down. Hardline Chechen rebels defied Maskhadov's leadership and launched cross-border attacks on neighbouring
Dagestan to the east, sparking a Russian crackdown that has continued since 1999. Human rights organisation Memorial estimates the number of killed or missing civilians at up to 50,000 for the first
Chechen war and up to 25,000 for the second and its aftermath. According
to official figures, around 10,000 servicemen were killed in both wars, but experts and rights campaigners say the toll is
much higher. Memorial, for example, estimates about 15,000 Russian
soldiers have died in total, while others estimate up to 40,000. HOMES IN RUINS
Russian military personnel patrol in Grozny, 2005. Tsarnayev At the height of the conflict in early 2000, Human Rights Watch said
300,000 people had been forced out of their homes by violence and human rights abuses by security forces and Chechen rebels.
As the war cooled down, authorities put heavy pressure on the
displaced to go home, and in 2004 authorities closed camps in the neighbouring Russian republic of Ingushetia that housed
the majority of refugees. The head of Norwegian Refugee Council's Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre said in early
2007 that authorities throughout Russia were still pushing displaced Chechens to go back to Chechnya. But there were still more than 50,000 displaced Chechens living in private accommodation
in early 2008, as well as almost 6,000 still in temporary homes, according to the U.N. refugee agency, UNHCR. The Danish Refugee Council said almost 13,000 displaced Chechens were still in Ingushetia
and Russian non-governmental organisation VESTA registered about 4,000 remaining in Dagestan, also a Russian republic. Unemployment is rampant, but the Chechen capital, Grozny, is getting back on its feet
after 85 percent of it was damaged or destroyed by heavy fire during major offensives at the end of 1994 and again in 1999-2000.
Wrecked apartment buildings are being rebuilt and the town's
heavily damaged schools and water systems are being repaired. Small businesses are sprouting, the civilian airport has re-opened
and the stadium has been refurbished. However, landmines laid by
both Chechen rebels and pro-Russian forces are still a danger to civilians in rural and urban areas. They caused 45 deaths
and injuries in Chechnya in 2006, an increase compared to 24 the previous year, according to the 2007 Landmine Monitor Report.
POLITICS AND ATTITUDES IN RUSSIA
Ramzan Kadyrov meets journalists in Gudermes,
near Grozny, 2006. Tsarneyev Armed pro-separatists
still want self-rule, and sporadic fighting continues in the mountains and south of the republic. But Russia has scaled down
its presence in Chechnya and left the local pro-Moscow government to stabilise the region.
Influence has shifted heavily into the hands of Chechnya's President Ramzan Kadyrov, who has
maintained an iron-fisted policy towards the rebels. The stocky,
bearded Kadyrov, who keeps tiger cubs for pets, heads a powerful private militia that analysts warn is loyal to him but not
necessarily to Russia. Numbers of Russian troops in Chechnya have
dropped significantly. Tony Wood - a journalist and author who's written extensively about Chechnya - estimated in 2007
there were about 8,000 pro-Moscow security forces, down from about 60,000 Russian soldiers in the republic in 2005. Russia says there are a few hundred separatist combatants still fighting, while independent
analysts say there are certainly no more than 2,000. The high death
toll among young Russian soldiers - many of them conscripts - sent to Chechnya angered the Russian public. Wood wrote in New
Left Review that the monthly average for Russian losses in Chechnya was higher in 2004 than U.S deaths in Iraq in the same
year. Even though the war's intensity has cooled considerably,
at least two or three Russian soldiers are killed every week, estimates Wood. The 1999 election of Russian President Vladimir Putin mandate was primarily based on his promise to crack down on
the perpetrators of bomb attacks in 1999 that killed about 300 Russians, which Moscow blames on Chechens while some argue
there was evidence of Russian security forces' involvement. The
September 2004 siege of a school in Beslan, North Ossetia, was blamed on fighters with links to Chechen separatists. At least
330 people died in the attack, more than half of them children. Russian
special forces killed the alleged mastermind of the atrocity, warlord Shamil Basayev, in July 2006. A DANGEROUS PLACE
The International Committee of the Red
Cross distributes mattresses and hygiene packs to displaced people in Shali. Boris Heger Civilians no longer live in fear of being caught in crossfire, but analysts say Kadyrov's
security guards preside over a climate of intimidation that affects the general public as well as aid agencies and journalists.
Human Rights Watch says extra-judicial executions, forced disappearances
and torture haven't gone away, and have in fact spread to other republics of the North Caucasus. It says pro-Russian forces
under Kadryov now appear to be behind most of the kidnappings, whereas a few years ago it was primarily Russian federal forces.
More people seem to be released after being detained and beaten,
rather than disappearing permanently as they did in the past. The
International Committee of the Red Cross - which monitors conditions for political prisoners around the world - has been prevented
by Russian authorities from visiting detainees in Chechnya since September 2004. Russian newspaper Novaya Gazeta says the murder of one of its journalists, Anna Politkovskaya, in central Moscow
in October 2006, was linked to Kadyrov: either to silence his critic or a ploy by rivals to discredit him. He denies any involvement.
Some international aid staff are returning to Chechnya, but it remains
highly dangerous for journalists and aid workers. Most relief agencies are based instead in Vladikavkaz, capital of North
Ossetia, and make day trips to the other republics in the region. Chechnya
is still one of a handful of places in the world - along with Somalia and Iraq - where many international humanitarian agencies
routinely employ armed escorts. Many non-governmental organisations
say it is a repressive climate for international and domestic civil society, and getting worse. Scores of aid agencies and rights organisations were forced to temporarily suspend their work for
several months in late 2006 because of new legislation limiting access to foreign funding and putting tight rules on NGO registration.
Aid agencies say the new law, introduced by Putin in early 2006,
gave the central administration sweeping powers to step in and stop organisations' work or close them down with little
or no accountability. THE ROLE OF ISLAM Some Chechen nationalists favour introducing Islamic sharia law, and others advocate
an independent secular state. The debate split the region after
Russian troops pulled out in 1996, and the subsequent Chechen government's adoption of some elements of Islamic law alienated
many former allies. The head of its sharia law court was Abdul-Khalim Saduleyev, who was leader of the separatist movement
for a year until he was killed in June 2006. Saduleyev was succeeded by warlord Doku Umarov, longtime commander of troops
in the field. Ironically, the pro-Moscow Chechens now in power have
brought in elements of religious law themselves, enforcing head scarves for women and cracking down on alcohol and gambling.
Kadyrov also promotes polygamy, in contravention of the Russian constitution. It appeared the pro-Islamists had won the debate within the separatist movement when Sadulayev appointed Movladi
Udugov - who advocates a state ruled by Islamic law - as sole spokesman for the group in 2006. His main rival was Akhmed Zakayev,
who believes in building a Western-style democracy. The Chechen
struggle has garnered support from Muslim sympathisers around the world, and some of them are willing to take up arms. Many commentators think it is likely that Chechen fighters have links with international
Islamist rebel groups. "It has been known for years that Muslim volunteers have travelled to Chechnya to join the fight,
reportedly after attending training camps in Afghanistan or Pakistan," the BBC says in an online Q&A on the conflict.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has used the world climate after
Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in the United States to garner support for his own "war on terrorism". Sufi Islam has played a role in differentiating Chechen identity from other peoples
around them, and religious leaders have united disparate cultures against Russian colonialism through the centuries. INGUSHETIA AND DAGESTAN Security analysts say violence in Chechnya has spilled over into Ingushetia and Dagestan, where bombings and shootouts
are frequent, partly because Kadyrov has imposed more security. Chechens
have family, cultural and religious ties with Ingushetia, immediately to the west. Dagestan, to the east, lies on the Caspian
Sea and is also a predominantly Muslim republic. Chechnya and Ingushetia
were united in one region in Soviet times, but Ingushetia decided to break with Chechnya in 1991, partly because its people
seem to prefer avoiding direct confrontation with Moscow. Ingushetia
- a poor, mainly Muslim republic of about 400,000 people - was racked by bomb attacks and murders in 2008 as federal forces
and rebels fought for control, instability which analysts said could spread. There were street protests in the capital, Nazran, after the August 2008 death in police custody of opposition leader
Magomed Yevloyev - owner of www.ingushetiya.ru, a website which both the Ingush president and Russian courts had tried to
ban. Further west, in the republic of Kabardino-Balkaria, dozens
of people died in October 2005 when police quashed a rebellion in the town of Nalchik. Chechen rebels said they staged the
Nalchik raid with support from local anti-Kremlin insurgents. Russia
believes Chechen rebels are sheltering in the Pankisi Gorge in Georgia, Chechnya's southern neighbour. Georgia - formerly
part of the Soviet Union but now independent from the Russian Federation - says it has tried to flush them out. HISTORY People collecting food as part of
the ICRC's food assistance programme in Grozny.
Fred Clarke Chechens can trace their presence in their land for 6,000 years, and they
have been rebelling for centuries - against Cossack settlers in the 16th century, and then against the Tsarist Empire in the
19th century. In 1944, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin accused the
Chechens and their Ingush neighbours of siding with Nazi Germany during World War Two - although thousands of them had fought
with the Red Army - and deported half a million of them to Siberia and Central Asia. About one-fifth died in Operation Lentil, which was so named because the start of the Russian word for lentil - chechevitsa
- identified who its principal targets were. Survivors weren't allowed back until 1957. Chechnya and its near neighbours are much poorer than the rest of Russia. Wages are lower, and unemployment
and infant mortality are significantly higher.
1) Diederick Lohman
One type of human rights violation that has often occurred over the past eight months of the conflict
has been the failure to provide safe exit routes allowing civilians to flee the war. On Dec 6 Russians
dropped leaflets from planes flying over Grozny, telling civilians to leave before Dec 11. Those
staying in the city were to be regarded as terrorists and bandits and destroyed by artillery and air force.
However, there was no clear indication of the safe routes, no transport and the shelling had
not stopped. Moreover, checkpoints along roads were turned into places where Russian soldiers would abuse Chechen
civilians and force them to pay bribes which severely hindered the fleeing. Human Rights Watch
(HRW) has documented an incident in which a safe exit route was attacked. On Oct 29 the Russian air
force carried out a rocket attack on a large convoy of refugees who were using a safe exit route after
it was officially announced that the border with Ingushetia would reopen following a week's
closure. The casualties are estimated at 50-100, including several Red Cross workers, two journalists and
many women and children.
Summary executions were also carried out. HRW collected evidence
of 4 incidents where Russian soldiers executed numerous Chechen civilians. HRW has so far confirmed
130 people were killed in this manner and documented dozens of allegations of further summary executions
in various parts of Chechnya. Typically, these summary executions occurred after the Russian Ministry
of Defence had established control over a town or village. Riot troops of the Ministry of Interior
would then arrive to carry out so-called mopping-up operations - but they were often drunk, burning
houses, looting and killing local civilians. One example is a massacre that occurred in the Grozny
district of Novye Aldi on February 5 where 60-80 people were shot dead.
Chechens
have committed abuses as well, with the most serious ones occurring between the two wars and during the attack
on Dagestan. However, during this war the abuses committed by Chechens have been generally much
less serious than Russian abuses. Chechen fighters often exposed towns and villages to Russian shelling by
not leaving them despite being asked by village elders. They would also position themselves
in or near areas populated by civilians, often opening fire from these areas and then quickly retreating, drawing
Russian counterfire there.
The international community has failed to respond appropriately
to violations in Chechnya. This raises serious questions. If Russia can get away with a brutal
war this easily, how bad do things have to get before the international community is willing to respond
appropriately? Or is the lesson that follows: if a country is as powerful as Russia, it can murder,
torture, detain, rape its own citizens, and bomb, burn and loot their houses, at will? The international
community must act firmly.
Editorial War Crimes and Human Rights Violations in Chechnya
Oleg Orlov I represent the Memorial organization which has been working in
the Caucasus, specifically in the Northern Caucasus, for several years. We have been monitoring human rights
in the region since the early 90's.
During the first war, we organized a human
rights observation mission in areas of conflict. Between the wars, we repeatedly sent teams
both to Chechnya and to neighboring regions. Our mission has been working in Ingushetia since the beginning
of the present second war.
Representatives of human rights organizations are virtually
unable to get into Chechnya itself due to the obstacles erected by the Russian authorities.
Nevertheless, our field workers have been able to collect on-sight information and, frequently, from Chechnya
as well.
I'll begin with several general words about Memorial's position
on the conflict. First of all, I must say that we have a significant amount of material enabling us to state
that in the period 1996-1999, power structures in the Chechen Republic showed a complete inability
to protect the lives and ensure the security and civil rights of people living in Chechnya. Moreover, the state
in the process of formation manifested disregard for issues relating to human rights. For example,
here is a copy of so called Criminal Code of the Chechen Republic Ichkeria. Everybody familiar with its will
note that it seriously violates international human rights standards. Additionally, I should
point out that the power structures of the Chechen Republic Ichkeria failed to tackle the wave of banditry,
kidnapping and criminal violence coming from the republic and spilling into neighboring Russian
regions. The sum of these factors allows us to state that, from our point
of view, the question of granting Chechnya the status of an independent state cannot be on the agenda of talks
on any level at the present moment. The essence of the dangers Chechnya poses to its neighbors
is evident in the attacks of armed groups, carried out from the Chechen territory, late summer and early fall
last year. I was in Dagestan myself at that time and I witnessed those events.
The
attack on Dagestan forced the Russian government to take serious measures to secure the lives and civil rights
of the Russian as well as the Chechen population. In order to fulfill these goals, the use of
force was acceptable. But it should have been implemented in strict accordance with the law, selective and
proportional to the threat. The Russian leadership launched a military campaign which cannot
be considered proportional to the threat.
The operations of the Russian forces in the Northern Caucasus
are in breach of the laws and the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Many constitutional
rights have been curtailed, such as those relating to the freedom of movement, the freedom of choice of residence,
and so on. Russian law allows for such measures - in the event of a declaration of a state of emergency. But
a state of emergency has not been declared.
We believe that
the violent means used by the Russian federal forces and authorities in Chechnya have turned the war into a
great and terrible crime. The way force is being used by Russia, let me say it once more, is
a crime.
Of course, human rights and humanitarian laws have been seriously violated
by both sides. But the number of civilian casualties and the scope of destruction of civilian property caused
by the activities of the Russian federal forces is incomparably higher. Moreover, I must stress
that the operations of the Russian military and police are operations of forces under the command of the Russian
state which, by signing a number of international treaties, is obliged to observe human rights.
This fact lends particular seriousness to the violations of Russian forces.
The
war has been going on against a backdrop of constant lying. Russian authorities have coined a whole range of
phrases and terms, such as "anti-terrorist operation", "accurate strike",
"humanitarian corridors for the exit of population", "safe zones". They have even begun
to believe these euphemisms refer to things which actually exist. If there is any reality behind these
terms, it is a virtual reality, which has nothing to do with the real developments in Chechnya.
There is no reason to call the current war in Chechnya an anti-terrorist operation. Undoubtedly, it is not
an "international" conflict, which is subject to the Geneva Conventions, namely Article 3 common
to the Geneva conventions and the Second Additional Protocol. The conflict in Chechnya has fulfilled all criteria
of a conflict not of an international character as stipulated by the Second Additional Protocol
to the Geneva Conventions. We can see a large-scale operation with the use of air force, salvo fire and tactical
rockets. Inhabited places are attacked and nearly wiped off the face of the earth. And Mr. Putin
calls that an anti-terrorist operation. The operation cannot be considered anti-terrorist even by Russian anti-terrorist
legislation, which again underlines the serious violation of Russia's own laws.
Let me change the subject for a minute in order to correct some misunderstandings which may divide some even
in this audience. Some say: "Yes, military operations were under way - but peace is coming
and the military part of the conflict in the North Caucasus is over." Unfortunately, this is not true.
These are misperceptions intentionally disseminated by official Russian propaganda. They are
in sharp contrast with the figures provided by official Russian representatives themselves. For example, over
the week of April 27 - May 4, Russian federal forces suffered 32 deaths and 107 injuries in
Chechnya. Over the second week of May, the losses of Russian federal forces reached as many as 51, with an
additional 70 men injured. And this was is when they were claiming that there were no serious
military operations under way. Dozens of Russian soldiers are being killed every week.
On April 30, a debate was held on the possible commitment of long-range bombardment aviation and an increase
in ammunition for bombing mountainous parts of Chechnya. The number of sorties for the bombardment of
these areas significantly increased in May. This shows that the war is not over. The war is going on and there
is no sign that it will stop. Information coming from the mountains now is very limited and
poor - and this is due to deliberate censorship by the Russian authorities.
Let
me return to the assessment of the conflict. I should say that if this were an anti-terrorist operation, it
would have to have one distinctive feature, namely selectivity. An anti-terrorist operation
should aim, first of all, at the protection of civilians and then at the isolation and liquidation of terrorists.
What do we witness in reality? It is completely the other way around. Since the very beginning,
the operation carried out by Russian armed forces in Chechnya has been characterized by its indiscriminate
nature.
I'll give you just a few examples from different periods of the conflict.
At the beginning of the conflict, on October 27, Russian media announced that Shamil Basayev's house of
had been hit by a rocket strike. They announced that the house had been destroyed and that Shamil
Basayev himself had survived, though some people around him, namely his bodyguards, had died. It was presented
as a successful Russian military operation. They did not mention, however, that the rocket strike
and bombardment destroyed the entire neighborhood. At least five twelve-flat houses were destroyed, one five-storied
house, many one-storied houses, a market, a taxi stand including cars, passengers, and drivers.
At the moment, we do not know how many innocent people died so that several fighters and supporters
of Shamil Basayev could be killed. And we will never find out.
In the full course of this
war, large numbers of civilians are killed in an attempt to kill those who are referred to as terrorists by
the Russian government. We are not able to say how many innocent people have died, but we know
there have been thousands. T h o u s a n d s. Russian authorities called the strike against Shamil
Basayev's house an accurate strike. There was a tremendous amount of similar strikes throughout
Grozny and, as you know, Grozny has virtually been wiped off the face of the earth. Here
is another example from a later period of the conflict which shows that both parties pay absolutely no attention
to the interests of the civilian population. Shali, a large town-like village, was taken without
fighting by the Russian federal forces at the end of 1999. The federal command called that zone a safe zone.
This is another interesting term - a "safe zone".
Russian authorities
encouraged refugees to return and many people indeed started doing so. Life in the safe zone was not easy:
People were abused by those who were asked to protect them, namely by the police troops sent
to Chechnya from various parts of Russia. We have at least one documented case of rape and murder of a woman
in Shali during that period. Another example: authorities started distributing pensions to people
who hadn¥t received them for a long time. Pensions were distributed for the first time on February
8 and on February 9 a big crowd of people gathered at the Shali central square in order to receive
additional payments, make lists etc. No one knew that a small group of Chechen fighters entered
Shali at that moment. The group came to the local military HQ and surrounded it. The people had no idea
about it - they were simply surprised to see different armed people close to them. At that very
moment, a Russian tactical missile exploded above their heads. It was a response of the Russian command
to the report that a group of fighters entered Shali. The tactical missile is estimated to have
killed, roughly speaking, some 150 civilians. Then there came an attack by combat helicopters, which also caused
civilian casualties. The group of fighters left Shali, with quite small losses, amounting to
several men. Thus, we see that in order to kill several men, Russian forces kill hundreds of peaceful citizens
And here is another example which exposes the direct responsibility of the military
command for the indiscriminate use of force causing civilian deaths. This February Grozny itself was still
under the control of Chechen armed groups. The adjacent regions were already under the control
of the Russian federal forces and in these regions so called "safe zones" were to be established.
The large village of Katyr-Yurt was declared a safe zone. Refugees were encouraged to come back
and people began to do so. As it was a safe zone, many gathered in Katyr-Yurt, not only refugees from Katyr-Yurt,
but from other regions as well. The announcement of the zone being declared a safe zone had
been signed by Russian generals.
Later on we discovered that the same generals were simultaneously
working out a crafty and complex special operation with the aim of luring the fighters out of
Grozny. Misinformation was released claiming that some Russian commanders were allegedly willing to
provide Chechen fighters with a safe corridor in exchange for a large amount of money. The Chechen
fighters believed it and having paid some money they set off in the corridor deliberately provided
to them by the Russian military command. In the corridor they came across mine fields, artillery fire,
air strikes, they suffered high losses. They managed to get to the mountains, nevertheless.
This was officially presented as an excellent and successful operation. Russian generals spoke
completely openly on TV about the fact that they had prepared the operation. But they did not speak about the
fact that the corridor of death went through safe zones, such as the zone in Katyr-Yurt. Thus
after the Chechen fighters left Grozny and entered a village, the village immediately came under systematic
Russian artillery fire. This was the case of Alkhan-Kala, Zakan-Yurt, Shami-Yurt, Katyr-Yurt.
Some 200 peaceful inhabitants of Katyr-Yurt died in the village.
The village of
Gekhi-Chu, closer to the mountains, fell under terrible artillery fire after the fighters left. This was documented
by Russian television. I assume they did not understand themselves what they were actually showing.
They showed the use of vacuum charges in the village, which was full of peaceful inhabitants. Then the footage
recorded by Western journalists on the following day was presented, which showed women and children
who were killed in the village.
The shelling of the villages was followed by mopping-up
operations. This is another dreadful word, a "mopping-up operation" ("zachistka"),
which came from the police jargon and stands for the across-the-board inspection of people and houses in a
town or village. Terrible things often occur during these operations, such as executions, looting,
violence... We have documented evidence that in the village of Gekhi-Chu, for example, at least three people
were executed by shooting.
So this was a military operation, one of many, with the
only difference that the direct command responsibility of the generals was documented. In my
opinion the Russian command simply do not comprehend that they must take into consideration the civilian population.
They are completely ignorant of this fact.
The detention in the above mentioned
village Katyr-Yurt was indiscriminate. Similarly in addition to indiscriminate shelling, Russian forces
carry out indiscriminate arrests. This is another aspect of the current events in Chechnya, I mean
indiscriminate arrests, the system of filtration camps, the abuses of detainees.
What is a filtration camp? In fact, the term "filtration camp" is not very accurate. In the previous
war, filtration camps were places where all detainees were taken. However, there is no such
term in Russian legislation. Thus they can only be considered illegal places where Russian citizens are deprived
of freedom. Now, official status is occasionally assigned to these facilities.
For
example, the famous filtration camp in Chernokozovo has official status, namely as a pre-trial establishment
(sledstvennyj izoljator). There are other filtration camps, which have retained their name "filtration
camp" and are officially called temporary detention facilities (izoljator vremennovo soderzhaniya). They
are established at district departments of interior forces in various parts of Chechnya. They
have an official status and the guard consists of members of interior forces or so called "Specnaz"
of the Russian Ministry of Justice. The Specnaz is ill-famed for being extremely cruel. It is
used for suppressing prison revolts and it acts with extreme cruelty throughout Russia. It is quite understandable
that here, in Chechnya, when it enjoys full impunity, and in the context of war, its cruelty
is amplified.
After Chernokozovo attracted public attention and the Committee for
the Prevention of Torture of the Council of Europe as well as the delegations of the OSCE and the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe visited the place, the situation really started improving.
The staff in Chernokozovo was replaced, the food improved, and torture and beatings stopped. A great part of
the detainees were moved to the territory of the Stavropol region. But concomitantly, violence,
brutality and torture were merely moved to other camps, such as that in Urus-Martan.
Here is one testimony which we received from Urus-Martan. It is from a man who asked us not to disclose
his name, but we know it. "Throughout the first night, they bet us all nearly till the
morning. They made us call: ëLong live Penza OMON! Hurrah!' Those who refused to chant were brutally
beaten. There were at least thirty people in the cell, which was 3 metres long and 2 metres
wide. We would sit on our knees. There was no space to sit or lie. Four of us were unable to walk anymore.
... I was called five times for investigations. They asked me where the fighters were, who helped
them, they beat me with truncheons, rifle butts, boots. They tried to make me sign a paper saying that
I was a fighter. ... There were also 14 fighters, many of whom were injured and had fractures. Some
of them had already suffered from gangrene but no medical care was provided to them. ... Upon leaving,
they made me sign a document stating that they had not insulted nor beaten me." That man
was released, which means that he was innocent.
Besides official detention
facilities, there are many facilities without official status. They include various places in the territory
of military units or around road checkpoints. For example, as in the previous war, detainees
are transported to Khankala, a large military base near Grozny. This is done officially, though Khankala
has no official status as a detention facility.
The people who are transported to
the territory of military bases are kept either in holes dug into the ground, or in vehicles for
transporting prisoners. In Khankala, railway cars for transporting prisoners appeared. Where did they
come from? We have an inkling: Earlier this year a temporary detention facility was established
at the Chervlyonnaya railway junction. They combined railway cars for moving prisoners, named that a temporary
detention facility and held detainees there. The Committee for the Prevention of Torture of
the Council of Europe visited the place and considered it absolutely unsuitable for detention and insisted
on its closing down. Two months later, the Committee visited the site again. The facility had in
fact closed down and the railway cars had been moved somewhere else. And we have now discovered the cars
in Khankala. In other words, the official temporary detention facility was closed but the cars
were moved to Khankala where detainees are ñ unofficially - held.
Guards
treat detainees in Khankala very cruelly, even more cruelly than in other places. The reason is that people
in unofficial detention facilities are not registered anywhere. In official places, like Chernokozovo,
the staff is accountable and they keep lists of detainees. In unofficial places, crueler methods of inquiry
can be applied to the detainees because no one will bear responsibility if something bad happens.
Detainees "disappear" there more easily. Here is another example of how people disappear in unofficial
detention places. We have documented evidence from one of the checkpoints, specifically, a checkpoint
on the road near the village Duba-Yurt. I underline that it is one of many checkpoints. During January,
February and March , at least three cases of disappearance of a group of men occurred. The first
case took place on January 13, when four men were detained under the pretense of checking documents.
They then disappeared. On May 10 the inhabitants of the Tangi-Chu village discovered the bodies of
three of the men. The whereabouts of the fourth man is still unknown.
The second
case occurred on February 18, when two men disappeared. Their relatives went off in search of them and discovered
their two cars, which were buried not deep under ground, and apparently crushed by tanks or
armored fighting vehicles. No one knows where the two missing persons are.
The third
case occurred in March. Twelve people were detained, of whom five women were released afterwards.. These people
came from the mountain village Ulus-Kert and were accompanied by a Russian paratrooper. Some
time before that a group of Russian paratroopers had entered the village and warned the villagers: ëOther
units are coming behind us and they will treat you very brutally. You¥d better leave the
village now.' And one of the paratroopers offered to accompany the group of villagers to the plains. When
they reached the Duba-Yurt checkpoint, soldiers at the checkpoint took the paratrooper aside,
beat him up, claiming that he had sold himself to the Chechens and asked him how much they had paid him. Then
they took him somewhere, released the women and detained the men, who were twelve. Nothing has
been discovered about them since, despite official inquires sent to various Russian official bodies by relatives,
us, and members of parliament. So far, no clear responses have been offered.
We
hope that criminal proceeding will be launched because it is known that at least in two cases the checkpoint
was under the command of one specific officer and people are ready to identify him. His real
surname is not known because officers at checkpoints generally do not use their names. So this was just one
example of the numerous disappearances which occur.
Now I'd like to say that
despite these terrible stories, soldiers do not always behave with uniform brutality. There is usually a
difference and things strongly depend on the commander. For example, General Shamanov is known
as a man who cultivates cruelty in his units. General Troshev is a bit different, though he is is accused
of war crimes as well. We also know that younger officers behave in very different ways. It must
be stressed that people in Chechnya themselves identify a big difference between young conscript soldiers
("srochniki"), and so called contract soldiers ("kontraktniki"), who came
to Chechnya to make money. Contract soldiers commit the stark majority of crimes. Witnesses say that, on the
other hand, young soldiers have sheltered civilians from the abuses of contract soldiers in
many instances.
The worst thing is that serious crimes are committed by members
of law enforcement bodies, namely special police units, sent to Chechnya from various Russian regions. This
is frightening for many reasons - we can imagine how these people who, figuratively speaking,
have tasted blood in Chechnya, will keep law and order after they return home.
There are some distinctions to make here as well, however. For example, on April 24 there
was an incident in a small village Novaya Zhizn, belonging to the Gelda-Gen region. Before that, Chechen fighters
attacked a Russian military convoy in the same district, near the village Serzhen-Yurt, and
killed some Russian soldiers. In response, the OMON troops started "mopping up" many villages and
towns. They indiscriminately detained many people in Shali, who had no connection with fighters,
and severely beat them. A special police unit from the Ural entered the Novaya Zhizn village and started
indiscriminately detaining men and beating them up. The unit also beat women, including a pregnant
one, who aborted. But there was another special police unit in the Novaya Zhizn village, an OMON
unit coming from the Russian region Mordovia. There was somewhat of a mutual understanding between this
OMON group and the villagers. This OMON tried to stop the abuses and thus a skirmish took place
between the two OMONs. However, the newly arrived unit was more numerous and better armed and beat the
Mordovian OMON up and rid it of a video camera by which they tried to record the abuses. They
then beat locals and took eleven innocent men to their military base where they tortured them. They moved
these men by a helicopter to Khankala, where they held them in railway cars for transporting
prisoners.
Then a peculiar thing happened. When journalists came to the site, these
prisoners were presented as Chechen fighters. They were, however, allowed to comment and one man actually managed
to say: "I'm from Novaya Zhizn, I'm not a fighter, I haven't committed any offence."
After that journalists interviewed general Troshev, who responded without hesitation: "No,
they are fighters!", accusing them of some attack or another. All of this was presented on TV.
In the evening, the inhabitants of Novaya Zhizn discovered that people from their village had been
detained and accused of being fighters. The people from Novaya Zhizn organized a large demonstration
demanding the release of the detainees. So in addition to the scandal involving 0the fight between
the two OMONs, there was another debacle relating to the detention of the Novaya Zhizn villagers. In the
end, the people were freed. I underline, they were officially released, without any accusation
being brought against them. They were freed after being beaten, some of them seriously so. No apologies have
been made.
Criminal proceedings have been started against the special police
unit from the Ural by the local pro-Moscow Chechen prosecution. However, I don't believe they
will have much effect because the prosecution on the national level, that is by Russian bodies, is
de facto dysfunctional.
At the end of my speech, I'd like to underline once more that
the war is not over. The violations that are being committed in close connection with and during
military operations are pressing issues for Chechnya. But what is no less important is the behaviour
of Russian law enforcement bodies in so called liberated territories. It is crucial to ensure that
those guilty of crimes are somehow prosecuted.
|