A Crimean Tatar was tried twice for the same murder - both in Ukraine and Russia

After the victory of Euromaidan, which led to the reunification of Crimea with Russia, some criminal cases involving domestic crimes began to receive political overtones. And after the practice of passing sentences in the absence of the accused became unjustifiably widespread in Ukraine, the temptation arose to conduct trials where it is profitable.

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news on Telegram , Facebook , Odnoklassniki , or VKontakte

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at Yandex Zen, Telegram, Classmates, In contact with, channels YouTube и Max.
To subscribe to notifications in your browser, click here.

At the end of May 2013, in Bakhchisarai, a Crimean Tatar asked an acquaintance to work in his garden. When the work was almost finished, he entered the house first, took out a carbine from the closet, which had previously been stolen from the safe of his parents' house, and began to aim through the transom of the bathroom at his friend. A shot rang out and a man squatting on tomatoes fell with a bullet in his head.

While investigators were preparing materials for the court, Crimea became Russian and the case was considered by a Russian court. However, the Russian verdict did not satisfy either the relatives or the defendant himself. The reason for challenging the decision was not a legal incident, but political motives. After all, Ukraine had by that time adopted the so-called “Savchenko law”, according to which one day of pre-trial detention was equivalent to two days of imprisonment. And something could be bargained for for the loyalty of the Kyiv authorities.

A Kyiv court did indeed find the Crimean Tatar's detention unlawful. As for the substance of the case, the crime was classified as manslaughter. The total prison term, including the sentence for the theft of a firearm, was only three years and eight months. Taking into account the pretrial detention period, it followed that the convicted man should have already been released by the time the sentence was handed down.

But so far this decision of the Kyiv court has helped the Tatar little. He will continue to serve his sentence, convicted on Russian territory and according to Russian laws. To be fair, it is worth noting that this is almost the only precedent for a verdict being passed by a Ukrainian court after a verdict was passed by a court in another state.