Ingushetia: Hearing of the Tortures’ Case

Ingushetia: Hearing of the Tortures’ Case Began

At 12 p.m. on September 12, 2011, the first hearing of the case of Ilyas Nalgiev, the former senior police officer for the special cases for the counteraction to extremism of the criminal police of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Ingushetia, and Nazir Guliev, the former head of the Karabulak Police Department, began in the Karabulak Court of the Republic of Ingushetia. Nalgiev is accused of the crimes specified in the part 1, point “a”, “b”, and “c” of part 3 of the article 286 (exceeding of power), point “a” of part 3 of the article 111 (malicious damage), part 2 of the article 325 (theft or damage to documents, stamps, seals or abduction of excise stamps, special stamps or marks of conformity), point “c” of part 3 of the article 226 (theft or extortion of weapons, ammunition, explosives and explosive devices), and part 3 of the article 285 (abuse of power)of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation.

The appointed judge for the case is the federal judge Fatima Shamil’evna Ausheva. The prosecutor is Akhilgov.

Nalgiev and Guliev are charged with numerous counts regarding violation of the law whilst on duty. Overall, there are 13 people recognized as aggrieved persons.

We are interested in Guliev’s and Nalgiev’s case primarily because both persons involved are also charged with tortures of Zelimkhan Chitigov. Zelimkhan was detained on April 27, 2010 (see a note on the HRC Memorial’s website: He was brutally tortured during four days when he was tried to be forced to confess to various crimes ranging from the steeling of three chickens to the organization of an act of terrorism (see Gannushkina’s article “The Case of the Man who cannot Lie” Out of the torturers’ hand, Zelimkhan went out with a horrible diagnosis. He was doomed to spend the rest of his life confined to a wheelchair. The Committee “Civic Assistance” received Chitigov in Moscow, where doctors were able to raise him to his feet. The Human Rights Centre “Memorial” provided a legal support for Zelimkhan. The criminal case against Chitigov was closed only in August 2011.

At 10 a.m. on September, 12, the representatives of the aggrieved persons, witnesses, observers, and two of the accused, gathered around the Court’s building and in the halls. Nalgiev and Guliev arrived in the cars without license plates. They looked very self confident and claimed aloud various statements. For instance, Nalgiev claimed: “Let them bring anyone they want, we will be fine” (perhaps he meant Svetlana Gannushkina who arrived from Moscow). Guliev boasted: “I have talked to the head of the republic and explained everything to him”.

This demonstration of the fact that the defendants have everything under control would not be worth a penny unless their emissaries had constantly paid visits to Zelimkhan’s relatives before, threatened them and tried to force them not to go to the court and testify against the defendants. To the family’s and the witnesses’ credit, none of them refused to come to the court and give evidence.

At 11.30 a.m. all the participants of the process and the public came to the court room. The secretary announced the attendance of parties. The judge Ausheva proceeded to the determination of identities of the accused. Then it was found out that Guliev was not in the court room.
- Has he arrived? Asked Fatima Shamil’evna.
- Yes, he has. The secretary replied.
- So, where is he?
- Hanging around outside.
- Call him please. The judge asked.

The accused was called back. He entered the court room with no explanation of his weird behavior and sat down among the public.
In the process of the determination of identities, it was found out that Ilyas Nalgiev has a degree in philology. In 2009, he graduated from Ingushetia State University. Nalgiev refused to receive a letter of accusation.
Guliev also has a degree. In 1992, he graduated from the Oil Institute.

When Guliev’s identity was finally determined, the judge Ausheva read out the statement of his lawyer Magomedov, who reported that at the moment he was involved in another process in Makhachkala. The decision was made to postpone the case for two days.

Yet the lawyer of Nalgiev Aza Yandieva stood up and said that she had to leave the next day for two weeks for a treatment. As evidence of the necessity of the treatment she presented… a ticket for a train or for a plane. She had no medical documents.

The judge Ausheva asked the opinion of all interested parts and postponed the hearings for uncertain period of time.

The Human Rights Centre “Memorial” and the Committee “Civic Assistance” will closely monitor this milestone case for the North Caucasus. We are not “thirsty after blood” of the accused (this phrase has been thrown to us by someone in the court), but we are convinced that if those guilty of tortures would not be punished much more innocent blood would be shed.

September 16, 2011

The investigation of the case of “Karabulak werewolves” continues

The accused policemen threaten the witnesses, the victims renounce their claims, but there is still hope that the criminals will be punished

The investigation of the case of the former head of GOVD of Karabulak, Nazir Guliev, and his former deputy, Ilez Nalgiev, an unusual case for the North Caucasus, continues at Karabulak district court in Ingushetia. They are charged with abusing powers and inflicting grave bodily injuries on our client, Zelimkhan Chitigov (only Nalgiev is charged with this). The lawyers of the accused managed to postpone the beginning of the proceedings on the grounds of their sickness and workload, but in the end judge F.Sh. Ausheva displayed firmness: on the appeal from prosecutor, M. Akhilgov, she set the deadline for Nalgiev to settle his issues with the lawyer, and the process has started (about the events that had happened before October, 14, see:,,  ; see also A hundred hours in hell, Russkiy reporter, No. 37:

A court proceeding is always a drama, but even more so when those who have very recently been in power and are still intimately related to the authorities now stand in the dock.
The accused with connections

The testimony by the head of Karabulaksky police department (GOVD), Isa Khamkhoev, who took over after N. Guliev, are interesting not only because it reveals interesting characteristics of the accused, but also the spirit of the process. They explain a lot of the drama. Khamkhoev, who had been recognized as the victim of the case, was giving testimonies on October, 28, about how Guliev, who had been relieved from his duties, had been trying to occupy GOVD with his adjutants on September, 17, 2010.
In response to the question by prosecutor Akhilgov on what had happened on that day, Khamkhoev told, “The order by the Ministry of Interior charged me with acting as a head of GOVD of Karabulak. In the morning of September, 17, 2010, I was at work. I believe it was ten to 8, when Guliev tried to enter my office. Prior to this, in accordance with MoI order, I had announced plan “Krepost”: in case of attack or attempt at occupying the department, the plan “Krepost” is to be carried out in the department. The building was surrounded. However, for some unknown reason, Guliev managed to enter the department. In response to my question, what he needed, Guliev pushed me aside. I told him, “What are you doing, think twice!” But Guliev hit me. Then I used a sambo trick, and Guliev fell and hit over the table. He tried to pull out a gun, but I took it away from him and put in the safe. The GOVD officers heard the noise, rushed to the room and walked Guliev to the first floor.

Prosecutor Akhilgov: Why did you announce the plan “Krepost”?
The victim Khamkhoev: We had some information at our disposal that Guliev would attempt at occupying the department.
Prosecutor: What about the transport?
Victim: A few days before that I had called Guliev and asked him to return the office cars and the vehicles that had been stolen and were to be at the department’s premises at the disposal of the head of GOVD (the accused had used the stolen and found cars for their personal use – author’s note).
Prosecutor: What kind of vehicles were those?
Victim: These were three cars on the federal wanted list, VAZ 2114 and two Priora.
Prosecutor: And which was the business car?
Victim: Volga and the two Priora. Guliev answered me that he was going back to work on 17th. I told him in response that I would be the acting head of the department until further order from the Minister.
Prosecutor: After that, did you see Guliev on that same day?
Victim: Yes, at the office of the local police officers. He tried to hit me again, pushed the monitor on the floor, but the officers calmed him down.
Then Nalgiev’s lawyer, Aza Yandieva, continued the investigation.
Lawyer Yandieva: On August, 13, when Guliev left for his holidays, were you aware of the fact that he was not supposed to take the business cars with him?
Victim: Yes, I was, as well as of the fact that he must not take the active officers from PPS, a whole platoon, with him. I reported to the Minister about that and called Guliev multiple times.
Lawyer: And what did Guliev tell you?
Victim: Nothing
Lawyer: And which measures were taken after that?
Victim: I reported to the Minister
Lawyer: And what did the Minister say?
Victim: After that the head of the republic came and told that it is necessary to leave 2 people as Guliev’s guard, and the others were to return to the department
Lawyer: Did he say anything about the vehicles?
Victim: He told that one car had to be left with him, and the rest had to be taken.
Lawyer: Did you take?
Victim: No
Lawyer: Why?
Victim: What do you mean, why? I made attempts to get the vehicles back, but I was told at the MoI that I shouldn’t do anything so as to avoid conflicts.
Lawyer: Who exactly told you that?
Victim: I can’t tell.

So this is how a dismissed head of the militia leads away a whole troop of officers and the car fleet, and the heads of MoI doesn’t insist on it to be returned, so as to avoid the conflict! By doing this, the head provide him with the means to attempt at forced occupation of GOVD as well as secures his impunity, which is why they ought to share the responsibility for this unprecedented event with him.

Despite the harshness of his conflict with Guliev, Isa Khamkhoev announced no claims against the former militiaman and requested to investigate the case without his personal presence. It is possible that the current head of GOVD refused to claim against the former head because he won the fight. One should not forget that Isa Khamoev is one the few victims who refused to settle the conflict in vaynakhsky tradition (with participation of the elderly, with compensation to be paid out) and did not call upon the court to relieve them from punishment.

The witnesses’ sufferings

The most astonishing thing in the process is the witnesses and victims’ behavior. One often feels sympathy for what is happening to them when they find themselves in the middle of the hall, at the speaker tribune.

For example, here is the questioning of the GOVD officer on duty of Karabulak, Akhmetkhan Ganiev, summoned to the court to testify on the incidents of unlawful detention of the officers of Nazran inter-district investigatory department, Gorchkhanov and Paragulgov, and on the arrest of KAMAZ with oil products. It was Ganiev who was on duty at GOVD when these two and the arrested KAMAZ were brought there.

After reading out the testimonies that had been given by the witness during the investigation, the prosecutor asked him whether he agreed with everything laid out in the protocol.
Witness Ganiev: Yes, I agree.
Prosecutor: Do you testify to these words?
Witness: Yes, I do.
Prosecutor: During the investigation you mentioned that it was Guliev who ordered you to return to your office and not to interrupt with what was happening? Was it so?
Witness: I don’t remember.
The prosecutor, as well as many other in the hall, noticed that witness’ hands were shaking.
Judge Ausheva: How is it possible that you testify to your testimonies in the protocol, but in response to a concrete question you say that you can’t remember. Is that possible?
Witness: I can’t remember.
Judge: Was it your duty to be aware of everything that was going on at the premises of Karabulak GOVD?
Witness: Yes.
Judge: Were you aware? Did you try to interfere? At your GOVD, they used to put 5 people in one ward, including a woman. A KAMAZ with oil product was brought to the GOVD premises as well as a passenger car. Did you register them?
Witness: I don’t remember.
Judge: So it turns out that you did not fulfill your direct duties? You were subject to the strictest punishment in accordance with the legislation.
Judge: Were you performing your duties?
Witness: I don’t remember.
Judge: What is that you don’t remember?
Witness:  I remember nothing.
(laughter in the audience)

The judge suggested that the witness was released. The prosecutor told that more questions could arise, in response to which the judge said, “What can we do with the witness who suffers from strong amnesia condition? He won’t remember coming to the court tomorrow”.
Most of the witnesses of the case are suffering from memory loss. One of them could not even remember his education. Not only shaking hands reveal their tension and fear. Another witnesses tried to leave the court room after each answer. Many of them prefer not to show up at the court at all. On November, 17, the judge noted that there were more and more witnesses that require bringing to the court. Following that, the prosecutor suggested that a private decision for the policemen witnesses who disrupted the proceedings should be ordered addressed to the MoI Minister.

The defense tactics

Mass amnesia and shaking hands are indicators of regular work that is being performed over the witnesses by the accused and their lawyers. They are trying to prove, at whatever cost, that the investigator Adlan Ferzauli forged the criminal case against Guliev and Nalgiev. Many witnesses testify against the evidence given during the interrogation and either disproves the authenticity of their signatures of the protocols of the interrogation, or state that they had signed it without prior reading. Some of them, like Akhmetkhan Ganiev, manage to give new evidence that contradict those given during interrogation, and support the old ones at the same time.
On November, 8, an incident happened. It was to serve as an unambiguous testimony to the behind-the-scenes work aimed at discrediting the investigation. A former intern of Karabulakskiy GOVD, Isa Zurov, was summoned to interrogation regarding Gorchkhanov and Paragulgov’s detention. After first few questions by the prosecutor Isa unexpectedly told that investigator Ferzauli had visited him in the morning and offered him a paper with the following words, “At the court, say the things [that are written here], you still have a life to live…” The text in the paper was exactly what Zurov had said during the investigation. At the same time, according to the prosecutor, his very succinct testimonies did not contain anything significant, nothing that was worth pressurizing the witness. While testifying in the court about the morning visit by the investigator and about other things, Zurov kept giving self-contradictory answers and got totally confused when it became clear the Ferzauli could not have visited him since he had been away. His testimonies raised a wave of irony even from the defense side: lawyer Gulieva called the witness a godsend for the court. The prosecutor agreed and added, “He was sent to us by the Lord”.

The victims with no claims

The victims’ behavior, 14 in number, is of high resemblance to that of the witnesses. Most of them forwarded appeals to the court requesting proceedings in their absence and waivers of claims against the accused (i.e., the waiver to sue them, initiate civic cases to compensate the damages). This does not exculpate the accused, but it definitely pressurizes the parties psychologically and can possibly influence the outcome.

However, not all of the victims shirked the participation in the court hearings. They succeeded at bringing Islam Khamkhoev to the court (however, according to the prosecutor, with a lot of effort). The testimonies he gave at the court on November, 15, explained a lot in the case and are worth citing them almost fully. The prosecutor started the interrogation.
Prosecutor: Tell us whether you were brought to Karabulaksky GOVD in the night of 26th of July, 2010? Who was with you and why were you brought there?
Victim Khamkhoev: My brother Akhmed is working here, in Karabulak, he has a business, and he had asked me to go to the place where black oil was being pumped over and wagons shipped off. When we approached the place, five or six cars were sent out in our direction, we were detained and brought to GOVD.
Prosecutor: Who was with you?
Victim: Anzor Sultygov was with me in the car, and Khamkhoev, Lyanov and Kastoev were in KAMAZ. Well, all of us got detained and put in the ward. After a while we were walked out and I was told that I must pay one million ruble and car Lada Priora.
Prosecutor: Who told you that?
Victim:   Nalgiev Ilyas.
Prosecutor: Is he present here?
Victim:       Yes, he is sitting there (points at Nalgiev).
Prosecutor: Why did he order that from you?
Victim:       That’s what I asked him, why did they detain us and why was I to pay him such an amount and give the car to him? I was taken back to the ward and got walked out again in a while. He threatened me that they would find “things” in my car if I didn’t pay a million rubles and give Lada-Priora.
Prosecutor: Which “things”?
Victim:       I don’t know. He told, armoury, grenade, all such things.
Prosecutor: Did you know Nalgiev before the event?
Victim:       Yes.
Prosecutor: Did you tell him, “Hey, we know each other! What are you doing?”
Victim:       I swear, I told him everything I could. Here, he is sitting there. Then I called my brother and told him about Nalgiev’s orders. When we were released from the ward, my brother told me that he paid 600 000 rubles for us.
Prosecutor: Was anyone from the management present there at that moment?
Victim:       No. I didn’t see anyone else.
Prosecutor: Did Nalgiev mention that he had to share the money? Did he call any names? Did he mention that he had to talk to his boss?
Victim:       Yes, yes, he said “to the boss”.  He told that he would talk to his boss and come back.
Then Nalgiev’s lawyer, Aza Yandieva, took over the investigation. She, as always, tried to make the inconvenient witness lose his temper, confuse him in order to get the result she needed. She often succeeds at doing that. But Khamkhoev managed to keep up.
Lawyer Yandieva: I have a question to the accused Nalgiev, without interruption of interrogation of the witness. Nalgiev, stand up please. Do you testify to the witness’ words?
Accused Nagliev: No, I don’t.
Lawyer: Did you demand the money?
Accused: Why, what is he talking about! How can I demand such an amount of money? One has to commit something to be ordered to pay out a million. I don’t know what he is talking about here.
Lawyer: Were you involved in the detention in any respect?
Accused: No, I wasn’t involved at all.
Lawyer: (to the victim Khamkhoev) Did you say that the oil was being legally imported by you?
Victim: Yes. It was all legal. We had all the documents.
Lawyer: Victim, tell us please, everything was in accordance with the legislation, then why did you ever agreed to pay 600 000 rubles?
Victim: I’m telling you once again, I was told that “things” would be found in my car…
Lawyer: Did you ask, “Which things will be found in my car? Put as many as you wish. If it’s not mine, you won’t prove it”? Did you say that? Didn’t you defend yourself?
Victim: He told me that he would video record the process of these things being taken out of my car’s boot.
Lawyer: Here are the things, as you call it, don’t they have a name?
Victim: Well, the grenades, armory… How can I know what exactly he was going to take from my car. If one demands a car and a million rubles, then he would probably plant something serious.
Lawyer: No. Tell us, why did you actually call your brother, if everything was alright with you?
Victim: Who else could I call if not my own brother? If I had known your number and how cool you are, I’d call you! (Laughter in the audience)
Having been absorbed in the process of discrediting the victim, Yandieva failed to notice that she helped him to prove the fact of racketeering by Nalgiev.
Accused (to the victim): Have I ever threatened you?
Victim: Guliev’s people came to me multiple times. They threatened me and tried to frighten me. I don’t know who they were. They came in black Lada-Priora. They explicitly told me to withdraw my testimonies otherwise I’d feel sorry about it. I told that I wouldn’t withdraw my testimonies, go ahead and fulfill your threats.
Guliev’s lawyer, Magomadov: Did you turn to law-enforcement agencies? Did you personally write the statement?
Victim: Yes I did. Prior to writing the statement, or, more specifically, prior to submitting it with the court, it was at home, all ready, we used to sent out the people to their homes to settle the issue. We told them that if we submitted the claim, then the issue would be really hard to solve. No one reacted, and then I turned to court.
Judge: Tell us, will you start civil action?
Victim: No.
Judge: Do you have any claims on Nalgiev, Guliev?
Victim: No. They returned the money that they illicitly obtained from us, after which we made steps towards reconciliation. We settled the issue in accordance with vaynakhsky tradition.
Judge: Tell us, do you agree with the prosecutor on the punishment, or would you wish that the accused to not be punished?
Victim: Well, I’d rather one had mercy on them, within the legal possibilities.

Main topic

Despite the numerous incidents, the victims and the witnesses, everybody realizes that the main theme of the case is accusation of Nalgiev of torturing Zelimkhan Chitigov. If the fact of torturing is recognized and the court delivers the lawful sentence, then a long-term imprisonment is expected for Nalgiev. It will be the first sentence of the kind in Ingushetia. It can possibly serve as a caution for other nalgievs whose name is legion.

On October, 19, judge of Karabulak district court, M. Tumgoev, was summoned for interrogation. He delivered a decision on imprisonment as a punishment for Zelimkhan. The observer from Committee against tortures from Nizhny Novgorod, who was present at the process, noticed that prosecutor M. Murzabekov (the main prosecutor is M. Akhilgov; Murzabekov substitutes for him during some hearings) was interrogating the judge very cautiously, he didn’t ask the witness any inconvenient questions. Judge Tumgoev explained that a petition was indeed submitted to decide on imprisonment as a punishment for Chitigov. However, when he walked in the court room, he saw that the accused was lying on the bench in a cell. The judge himself, with the help of the militiamen who walked Zelimkhan in, were trying to bring him round, but failed to do so and called emergency. When the doctor started to give the first aid to Chitigov, he started to shout, “Take the forceps away from me!”, which indicates that he was apparently being mentally incompetent. The doctors told the judges that Zelimkhan needed urgent hospitalization, registered injuries of his externalities, body burns. The judge, however, took his time: he first looked into and then granted the appeal on the punishment. In any case, it is important to note that Zelimkhan was brought to the court room from Karabulakskiy GOVD in grave physical condition.

Investigator R. Kotiev was interrogated as well. He brought Zelimkhan to the court room and didn’t notice any bodily injuries, as well as the head of the criminal investigation department of OVD of Karabulak, Idris Vedzgiev, who signed the report on Chitigov’s detention. He claims that he hadn’t written the report and hadn’t detained Chitigov, and that the report had the report slipped to him to sign by his boss Nalgiev. The witness told the following story: as it came out, Zelimkhanov had been abducted, while Karabulaksky GOVD officers found him in two days in a mine. Chitigov got the numerous bodily injuries, allegedly, according to Chitigov’s own words, while “creeping about the mine: he was walking there and falling, walking and falling”. (Obviously, Zelimkhan never said anything of the kind, Vedzghiev himself tried to make him sign this piece of nonsense: he was beating him with a plastic bottle filled with water, strangling him with a telephone wire, but with no success).

Apparently, having had realized that the methods of pressurizing the witnesses and victims that had previously proved their efficiency might fail to succeed with the Chitigovs, Nalgiev’s defense took some extraordinary measures. On November, 1, Aza Yandieva, Nalgiev’s lawyer, made a sensational statement: her client had an alibi: turned out, from April, 16, to May, 8, 2010, Nalgiev was treated at ENT department at the Republic Hospital of Ingushetia, and could not, therefore, be involved in torturing Zelimkhan Chitigov. With regard to this information, the lawyer appealed to file to the case the medical certificate proving in-patient treatment of Nalgiev, and to hold accountable for false information (she didn’t specify who was to be held accountable). The certificate was filed, and the judge advised on forwarding the statement to the prosecutor’s office. It is easy to see why Nagliev hadn’t mentioned his alibi either during the investigation or the court hearings.

Another important event took place during that day: Maryam Esmurzieva testified during the hearings. She was summoned to Karabulak GOVD as the appointed counsel, when the militiamen, having failed to make Zelimkhan plead guilty of being involved in the terroristic act and having failed to destroy him, started to forge a case of storing explosive devices against him. Maryam was the first person without shoulder straps who saw Zelimkhan after four days of tortures. Her testimonies had such a strong impression that Nalgiev’s mother fainted, although when the people around, including Zelimkhan’s mother, rushed to help her and decided to call ambulance, she woke up briskly and stayed seated until the end of the hearings, showing no signs of malady.

Inter alia, Maryam mentioned that after she met Zelimkhan, she was summoned by N. Guliev. He told her that there was no need to defense people like Guliev, they have to be killed instead. Maryam answered that she wouldn’t refuse to defend him. Then Guliev started to curse and threaten her, “The same fate is expecting those against us”.
On November, 3, Sulambek Dzhunidov was summoned to the court. He told that he, together with a group of the elderly (15 to 20 people), on Zelimkhan’s father request, first went to meet Guliev’s relatives, and then to Surkhakhi village to the Nalgievs. The investigator told that the aim of the visit was to ask to stop torturing Zelimkhan and to carry out a just investigation, if he was indeed guilty of anything. Nagliev told, “Go away, we have nothing to talk about. You have murdered our brother and then came to us… I personally know that it was Zelimkhan Chitigov who pushed the button and brought the explosive device into action” (Nalgiev states, on no grounds, that Zelimkhan was involved in the terroristic act near Karabulak GOVD on April, 5, 2010, as a result of which his brother Magomed had died. Despite the inhuman tortures, they failed to make Zelimkhan plead guilty of having committed the crime, and then the accusation of storing an explosive device was forged against him).

Nalgiev denied that he had met the elderly at the court hearings and stated that he had been at hospital on that day, which confused the witness. He tried to refresh Nalgiev’s memory by giving him some details and naming him the people by whom he had been standing. But Nalgiev was stubbornly repeating, “I don’t know what you are talking about, you couldn’t have seen me. You are telling lies”. Desperate Dzhunidov told that he could swear by Koran.

On that same day an operative authorized officer of Karabulak GOVD, Zaur Dzeytov, was giving his testimonies. His answers were very succinct. He told that in the evening of April, 30, (on the eve on the day when lawyer Esmurzieva saw him and when he was taken from the court room to hospital in emergency car) Zelimkhan Chitigov was brought to him, that he looked normal, with no traces of beatings. At the same time he told that, according to Zelimkhan, he “had been beaten somewhere”. Dzeytov confirmed that he had seen Zelimkhan come to the department a few days before that so as to find out why the militia officers had been curious about him. “I called to the department on-duty, explained the situation to them”, Dzeytov told. – They explained that nobody has ever summoned him. I told this to Chitigov, and he left home”. It was the evening of April, 26, and early in the morning of the following day MoI officers came for Zelimkhan in a few cars and took him from his home, his arms twisted behind his back, as if he were a dangerous criminal.

The question is, why did they abducted someone who came to the police himself a day before? Why didn’t GOVD officers, if they had any question for Zelimkhan Chitigov, use this visit as an opportunity to ask them? The answer is simple: they had known that he was innocent and had already selected him as the victim, they had been going to abduct him and elicit the testimonies they needed from him instead of conducting investigation and collecting evidence. They didn’t need a free and law-abiding person who has trust in the police. They needed a person tormented, humiliated, shaking with fear of abduction, ready to sign anything just to stop the sufferings.

On November, 17, Khuseyn Toldiev answered the court’s questions. He is a former head of the Center of combating extremism of MoI of Ingushetia. He was the head of the religious department while Zelimkhan was being tortured at the Center. Toldiev stated that Chitigov hadn’t been brought to the Center, but generally tried to avoid answering questions unambiguously. For example, here is a part of Toldiev’s interrogation by the Chitigovs’ lawyer, T. Zechoeva.

Lawyer Zechoeva: Were you in touch with Nalgiev in March, May, April?
Witness Toldiev: I keep communication with my officers, no problems about it.
Lawyer: Do you know whether Nalgiev was at hospital [on sick leave] in April and May?
Witness: There was a terroristic act, and, accordingly, he had to be on sick leave. When they are directly performing their duties, they are not my officers. And during that period they were not my officers. They formed a part of our staff, but they performed duties, in accordance with the Minister’s order, for Karabulak GOVD.

Try and figure out whether Guliev and Nalgiev were his officers or not.

In the end of November two important witnesses testified who hadn’t given testimonies during the investigation and due to this fact they were left behind the accused’ obtrusive attention. These people are the Chitigovs’ neighbors in “Promgilbaza” (the location of compact residence of refugees from Chechnya), Aset Khadisova and Moltkhan Dzhokhaeva.

From A. Khadisova’s testimonies:
“On April, 26, 2010 I was stopped by two people on Promgilbaza premises. One of them introduced himself as a local police officer. They asked me about Chitigov, asked to characterize him, all in all, to tell about his behavior. I have him positive description and invited them to come up to their place (to the Chitigovs). In the next morning, Zelimkhan was taken away.
Everyone was wearing camouflage uniform and masks. We were told that it was passport check. Then I saw Zelimkhan being walked. They walked him clumsily, his hands tied behind his back. They bent his back down and then pushed him in one of the cars. Zelimkhan didn’t resist. I briefly walked up the path behind the building, even though I was in the last month of pregnancy, I saw the cars drive away to the side of Karabulak”.
From M. Dzhokhaeva’s testimonies:
“On April, 27, masked people broke in..  The superintendant told that they were looking for Zelimkhan, and he came up with them to the Chitigovs. Then I saw Zelimkhan being walked, and shouted to Zukhra, “Run, why are you standing there, get in the car with him!” And Zukhra answered, “My son is not guilty, they would let him go”.
On April, 29, unidentified people came to them again, surrounded the whole ground floor, Nalgiev was among them. I told Nalgiev, “What are you doing? He is an Ingush, just like you!” And he answered, “Who will revive my murdered brother?”

These testimonies prove that Zelimkhan was illicitly abducted on April, 27, 2010 and disprove Nalgiev’s ‘alibi’.  It was for a reason that after Moltkhan Dzhokhaeva’s speech Nalgiev screamed out, “Now they will kill the woman so that to put the blame on me!” This is this man’s style, to spread disguised threats right in the court room.
Zelimkhan’s mother, Zukhra Chitigova, testified as well. She told that she had seen Nalgiev and talked to him at Promgilbaza on April, 29, during the search, when an explosive device had been found in her newly-born granddaughter’s diapers. It was about to explode any minute and was, therefore, destroyed immediately. According to the neighbors, Nalgiev had grabbed Zelimkhan’s wife and been beating her against the wall before she came.

The process culminated with Zelimkhan’s father and his legal representative, Sheykh-Magomed Chitigov, testimonies, on November, 28, 2011.
He told that when he had found out about his son’s detention, he went to Karabulak GOVD with his relatives in order to find out why his son had been detained. No one agreed to talk to him, though. Then, through a friend, Sh. Chitigov asked to tell to the administration of GOVD that he was ready to publicly punish his son himself if he was guilty, only if they tell him where he was and what he was guilty of. His request was ignored. Even before that Chitigov had found out from the GOVD interns that his son had been being tortured. Together with 15 relatives he came to the Nalgievs’ house and asked to stop torturing his son. They wouldn’t listen. Sh. Chitigov told that he was ready to forgive if the apologies had been given to him, but that never happened.

In response to some qualifying questions, Sh. Chitigov explained that he first received a note from his son where he wrote the names of the people responsible for the tortures. Then, when Zelimkhan was taken to hospital, he managed to talk to him and learned the details about the detention and tortures. Zelimkhan had been tortured at the building of the Center for combating extremism. Sh. Chitigov described the tortures: they would run electric current through his body, beat him with fixtures, tear his nails out, two people would sit on his shoulders while the third would break his legs out. Sh. Chitigov doesn’t know who exactly was running the electric current and tearing Zelimkhanov’s nails off, but his son saw Nalgiev who was cursing, pushed a gun in his mouth, beat him in between his legs, pushed the gun from behind, spitted on him, and urinated. Nalgiev wanted to get Zelimkhan to give testimonies about who had murdered his brother. Sh. Chitigov learned all these details from Zelimkhan and other witnesses, from which Sh. Chitigov only named a militia officer Barakhoev. He wouldn’t name the others but promised to tell if it was necessary, if they would need to resolve the issue in accordance with vakhanayskiye traditions.

Sheykh-Magomed’s story impressed the audience a lot, including the judge, she was apparently moved.
Prosecutor Murzabekov asked whether Nalgiev alone was capable of inflicting such severe damage to Zelimkhan’s health. Chitigov answered positively. “Maybe he wasn’t torturing him with electric current, but he was capable of causing all the other damages. If I wanted to lie, – Sh. Chitigov said, – I could tell that Guliev tortured him as well, but if it didn’t happen, it didn’t happen”.
Nalgiev, as usual, denied everything. Guliev stated that Nalgiev had been treated at hospital at the time, and that he had visited him at the hospital. And he added at the end, “ I am appalled that this incident with Chitigov is being hyped so much. Numerous similar incidents have happened all over the Republic”. Guliev’s appall is easy to understand, but the heads of the law enforcement authorities should listen to his expert opinion: a lot of similar events have happened all over the Republic, which is why it is unfair to only punish Guliev and Nalgiev.

On November, 22, the Board of the Supreme Court of Ingushetia looked into the appeal from the lawyers of the Chitigovs, T. Zechoeva and H. Hasanova, against denial by Karabulak district court to change the punishment of Nalgiev and Guliev from a written pledge not to leave to imprisonment.

In their speech, the Chitigovs lawyers stressed that Nalgiev had been pressurizing the witnesses, including Zelimkhan’s mother, Zukhra Chitigova, who was forced to submit a complaint to the prosecutor’s office in this regard. The Chitigovs have been deprived of normal life due to the threats by the accused. They try to avoid leaving their house, Zelimkhan’s sisters don’t go to school and university. Some of the witnesses have withdrawn their testimonies given at the preliminary investigation due to the pressure by the accused. Most of the victims waived their claims against Guliev and Nalgiev.

Lawyer T. Zechoeva turned the court’s attention to the fact that Nalgiev is being charged with the crimes, two of which are of gravest severity. Maximal imprisonment terms (up to 12 years) are stipulated for such crimes. Three of the crimes are grave, and the punishment of imprisonment of more than 10 years is stipulated. One of the crimes is of medium severity and 5 years of imprisonment is stipulated. At the same time, the custody, according to the legislation, is stipulated for the accused who are charged with the crimes for which the criminal code stipulates the punishment of imprisonment of more than 2 years.

The Board decided to annul the resolution of Karabulak district court and forward the case for new investigation.
This is an important success. However, there is little hope that Karabulak court would venture to change the punishment for Nalgiev and Guliev for imprisonment. One of the indications to this is the judge and the prosecutor’s stance on the matter of providing Zelimkhan’s mother, Zukhra Chitigova, with the state protection. Zukhra’s appeal was motivated by numerous threats to her and her husband from Nalgiev and his people.

For example, not long before the process started, a black Lada-Priora had driven up to the Chitigovs’ house in Chechnya, without number plates, the driver wearing camouflage uniform. The woman that got out of the car was trying to intimidate Zukhra so that she wouldn’t testify at the court. When Zukhra refused, she told her, “If you don’t pity yourself, pity your children at least”.

The Nalgievs have no shame to voice their threats even in the court room. On October, 28, upon the hearing’s ending, Nalgiev blocked the way out of the court room to Zukhra and lawyer Nelly Khasanova. His relatives and lawyers Yandieva and Magomadov were with him. Nalgiev demanded that Zukhra wrote a waiver of claims. She answered that she did have some very serious claims against him. Nalgiev stated that he could swear by Koran that he hadn’t touched her son with his finger. Then Zukhra asked, “Can you also swear that you didn’t come to our house on April, 29, during the search?” Nalgiev answered, “I can swear!” – “And I saw you. That’s what your swear is worth”. At that moment, Zukhra and Nelly managed to get in the corridor, and that’s when Nalgiev, who was just about to swear of his innocence with Koran, shouted to her, “I’ll make invalid out of you!”
However, not only the accused, but also prosecutor M. Akhilgov objected to providing Zukhra Chitigova with state protection. He stated that the accused and the victims keep insulting each other all the time, but he failed to notice any threats. By saying this, the prosecutor actually put the parties on the same footing: the victims who have no inclinations to violence, and the accused, who are charged with the gravest violent crimes.

The judge also found that the court, as of now, has no grounds for providing the state protection. She found that, since Z. Chitigova is an indirect witness, and her testimonies were filed to the protocol, the demands to waive her claims didn’t make any sense. Besides, a criminal case was initiated on the grounds of her statement about the treats in Chechnya. There is no information about the results. The judge suggested that Chitigova attaches the documents that give evidence of the treats, to her statements, and the materials of the criminal case that had been initiated on the grounds of her statement can be among such documents.

The judge’s reasoning, seemingly logical, only veil the reluctance to grant Zukhra’s appeal for state protection. For it doesn’t matter whether Nalgiev’s demands are reasonable or not, what matters is that a person like him would stand by his demands and keep threatening. While the advice to provide the documented evidence of the threats, especially in the presence of those who threatens, sounds like a sneer.

The court and the prosecution’s stance on providing Zukhra Chitigova with state protection seems strange: they truly wouldn’t like to provide the accused with the opportunity to fulfill their threats? Most probably, this position can be explained by the fact that providing Zukhra with the state protection would serve as acknowledgement of the fact that the Chitigovs are in real danger coming from the accused, and would become an additional argument in favor of changing the punishment to imprisonment.
On December, 12, Nalgiev, too, decided to put forth his objections in a written form against Zukhra’s application for state protection. This document deserves quoting (spelling and the punctuation preserved), “… Unintentionally, William Bolit’s words come to my mind, “The most important thing in life is not to make use of your success to the full. Any fool is capable of that. What is truly important is a skill to make the use out of your losses”. Thus, Chitigova would be quite happy if I threatened her, however, this is not a part of my plan to exaggerate the obstacles that are already large on my way set up by the investigator of the investigatory department of the city of Karabulak… and the use out of their losses the couple of the Chitigovs can make which is quite obvious. Chitigova has taken her son… abroad with the punishment still not abolished… where the latter is present under the refugee status. And by marring the reality by lampoons Chitigova is trying with relation to the elderly members of the family to obtain refugee status. Moreover, from the latter side during the whole process one can observe bazaar vocabulary, bazaar spontaneity…”

One can’t help but ‘thank’ Nalgiev for “bazaar spontaneity”: a wonderful expression which perfectly describes him.
Nothing else but spontaneity can explain the way this aphorism-from-the-web-lover reveals his own bazaar scale of values. Nalgiev mentions Zelimkhanov’s refugee status as if it were some kind of privilege. It is probably worth reminding him about the price that he had to pay for this privilege.

A young and strong guy became an invalid, spent nine month in hospital bed and in wheelchair, and, although miraculously stood on his feet again, his spine is invalid as well as his feet, he has bran cyst, torn tympanic membrane, major loss of eyesight, and the wound that would never heel in his heart.

Honest and earnest young man, in the beginning of his life, lost his faith in law, trust in the state, the hope for justice.
Vainakh, who loves his land, is forced to leave his mother land and live far away from his family and friends, just so that some nalgievs couldn’t take him out of his house and torture him again.

We hope that the services rendered to Zelimkhan by Nalgiev, who is not “enjoying” the refugee status, would receive fair assessment from the court.

Prepared by E. Burtina from audio records and written reports by the officers of Human Rights Center Memorial and Committee against Tortures who are in charge of monitoring the process.

January 16, 2012

Human Rights Center Memorial, 127051, Russia, Moscow, Maly Karetny, 12
tel: +7 (495) 225-3118, fax: +7 (495) 624-2025, email:

The Accused Guliev and Nalgiev are Trying to Make their Case Appear Politically Motivated

Svetlana Gannushkina

By the worst means, the worst. For mine own good,
All causes shall give way: I am in blood
Step’t in so far that, should I wade no more,
Returning were as tedious as go o’er…
W. Shakespeare. Macbeth

These lines from Macbeth occurred to me when on January, 12, on the website of First Informational Caucasian (FIC) TV Channel I saw three talking heads and listened to what the first of them had said. Nazir Guliev, former head of OVD (police department) of Karabulak of the Republic of Ingushetia, picking words with great difficulty, told about how he had been charged with guarding the oil, but the mission ended with initiating a criminal case against him. In the words of the former policeman, the case was forged in order to conceal the theft of the oil. He hinted that the head of the Republic of Ingushetia, Yunus-Bek Evkurov and his brother, Uvays, were responsible.
And that is told by Nazir Guliev? That same Guliev who had been showing off his links with Evkurov? The one who, exactly 4 months prior to the ‘exclusive’ interview for FIC, prior to the hearings on his and Nalgiev’s case entered the judge’s office without knocking and asked whether the head of Republic himself had called her. During the first few hearings Guliev was being cocky and bold, interrupted the victims and witnesses. In response to the victim’s lawyer’s question he asked the judge, “Who is she? Why is she asking me questions?”
One would immediately guess that the unexpected twist in Guliev’s fate was hardly his own plan.
The second head belonged to the former Guliev’s deputy, Ilez Nalgiev, who also claimed that “there will be no fairness” in Ingushetia as long as Evkurov is in power and added that the only reason he got on felon’s dock was the fuss over the oil.
And finally, Magomed Khazbiev’s head started to talk, who was dubbed a human rights activist in the piece of news. It looked like he was the author of the brilliant idea to turn the hyped case of the two extremist policemen into a political one and use it to “fight the regime”. Khazbiev claimed that the poor Nalgiev and Guliev are suffering solely because of the oil fight. His own involvement in the case Khazbiev commented in the following way, “It’s been only a few weeks since I got involved in the situation, and tomorrow I will go to the process myself”
Nalgiev and Guliev’s case has nothing to do with guarding the oil from theft. The tortures and arbitrariness are not related to the oil.
FIC named the material “Chitigov’s case – an exclusive interview for FIC channel”. The authors of the material give Chitigov’s (one of the victims) name to the case of the two accused, Guliev and Nagliev’s. At the same time, Guliev is not charged with the episode with Chitigov while there are 13 more victims of the case. Extraordinary attention to one of them is easy to explain: the episode in which Zelimkhan Chitigov, recognized as a victim, is the most brutal in Nalgiev and Chitigov’s case. Nalgiev is factually charged with torturing in this episode. This is more than a mere accusation of abusing of power (Art. 286 of the Criminal Code of the RF), it’s also accusation of causing serious harm to one’s health (Art. 111).
Only extraordinary spirit enabled Zelimkhan Chitigov to sustain Ilez Nalgiev and his adjutants’ atrocities. Pliev, who is mentioned by Nalgiev as the person who recognized his own and Zelimkhan’s guilt of terrorism, has been long released free. He was declared not guilty of terrorism, having had pleaded guilty of storing the arms. After being released, Pliev testified that he couldn’t sustain the tortures and slandered against himself and Zelimkhan. All these testimonies are now being proved by the current court proceedings.
Why FIC which often asks me and other “Memorial” officers for commentaries hasn’t done so in this case? Did they wish for a heated incriminatory exclusive material? Why haven’t the journalists looked up this channel of publications of their colleagues and human rights activists’ messages? They are abundant. See, for example:,, in Russian: ,,
Having read the materials above, one may easily see that all the Nalgiev and Guliev’s revelations about the pressure on Chitigov and the forged case against them are worthless. This type of so-called ‘exclusivity’ is a shame for a mass media, therefore the performed ‘unmasking’ of Ingush authorities are equally worthless.
Now let us try to understand what did Khabziev mean when he told that he had got involved in the situation, how exactly he got involved and why hadn’t he attended the latest hearings on the case of his partners in making the criminal case look political, the importance of which is explained exactly by the fact that it is the only case of that kind brought to court.
Another event preceded the appearance of the troika of revelators on January, 12, on FIC channel, an active part in which was taken by Magomed Khazbiev.
In the evening of January, 11, Khazbiev, Khashagulgov and the Nalgievs showed up in the house of Zelimkhan Chitigov’s mother’s elder brother, Khamzat Gardanov. According to Khamzat, the only reason he agreed to let the delegation in his house was the respect towards his neighbor Khashagulgov. The visitors asked Zelimkhan’s brother to influence him and convince him to withdraw his claim. Apparently, they implied that Zelimkhan and his mother Zukhra were to change their testimonies in the court. Khamzat firmly refused to discuss such a thing and asked the uninvited guests to leave. He added that he would never believe in Nalgiev’s impunity even if he swore, like Nalgiev suggested, by Koran. In response, the so-called human rights activist Magomed Khazbiev promised Khamzat that his family will be treated in accordance with vaynakhsky traditions.
The events took the following turn. On January, 12, the above-mentioned false ‘exclusive’ material was shown on FIC. The material can hardly be regarded as vaynakhsky traditions. At half past one a.m., as Nalgiev’s wife told later on, someone called her husband outside by the phone, and there was an explosion as a result of which Nalgiev was taken to reanimation ward. In just one hour a piece of news about this event appeared on website that is edited by Magomed Khazbiev. The swiftness to envy!
One can’t help but think that all the events are parts of a common plan to save the couple from Karabulak from the just punishment?! Judging by the political hue, the plan does not belong to “the brave fighters with oil riders”.
Needless to mention that the court hearings on the case that still has a long way to go has been postponed. Therefore Magomed Khazbiev missed out on the opportunity to hear the witnesses who had seen Zelimkhan after the tortures, which would be of great benefit to our human rights activist and fighter for the truth. Then he would learn that when Zelimkhan Chitigov was brought to Moscow in January, 2011, in a wheelchair with a diagnosis that said he would never be able to get out of the chair. A spine injury, spinal chord contusion, post-traumatic cerebrum cyst, eardrum rupture, otopyosis, restless and phobic syndrome do not complete the list of the consequences of communication of the young Chechen man with those who are now asking him to change his testimonies. “The patient is incapable of speaking and moving around independently”, said the conclusive remark from the medical report by Ingush doctors of June, 2010. A miracle happened: the doctors of Moscow hospital of I. Botkin managed to set Zelimkhan on his legs. His speech and intellectual capacity restored fully. However, the tortures caused irreparable damage to his health. Therefore, in order that other people would never go through the same sufferings, the perpetrators must be punished.
The doctors say that Ilez Nalgiev is to leave hospital soon. According to them, he feels well, which is a good thing. Nowadays it is only too easy to establish who had called him. And let the justice happen.
To conclude, I would like to provide a few figures. In the North Caucasus, personal loss among the officers of the security agencies decreased twofold in 2011 as compared to 2009. At the same time, attacks on the officers decreased by 8 times. The success proves that the citizens are gradually changing the attitude towards those who are to protect them and cease to expect only violence and humiliation. The only power to enforce the tendency is a just court that is capable of delivering lawful and grounded decisions.

January 17, 2012

Human Rights Center Memorial, 127051, Russia, Moscow, Maly Karetny, 12
tel: +7 (495) 225-3118, fax: +7 (495) 624-2025, email:

В Ингушетии взорвали дом экс-полицейского, подозреваемого в похищении и пытках человека E-mail
13.01.2012 08:23
В ночь на пятницу в Назранском районе Ингушетии прогремел мощный взрыв. Выяснилось, что взрывное устройство сработало во дворе дома, принадлежащего бывшему заместителю начальника  ГОВД Карабулака Илезу Нальгиеву, который проходит по уголовному делу о похищении человека. «В ночь на пятницу в селении Сурхахи во дворе частного дома, где проживает бывший полицейский, произошел мощный взрыв“. – сообщили в республиканском МВД. Там уточнили, что пострадавший проходит по уголовному делу вместе со своим начальником Назиром Гулиевым. По данным следствия, они похитили и пытали местного жителя, вымогая у него крупную сумму денег. Этот случай вызвал широкий общественный резонанс не только в республике, но и за ее пределами, отмечает Интерфакс.
Офицер полиции Илез Нальгиев, инсценировал покушение на самого себя
вс, 15/01/2012 – 12:54
Несколько дней назад состоялся очередной суд по делу бывшего начальника Карабулакского ГОВД Назира Гулиева и его заместителя Илеза Нальгиева, которых обвиняют в совершении пыток над жителем Ингушетии Зелимханом Читиговым.
Планировалось, что на следующем заседании, которое должно было состояться сегодня, 13 января, будет вынесено решение по изменению меры пресечения Илезу Нальгиеву на более строгую, в виде ареста. Нальгиев от такой перспективы прямо в суде неожиданно прослезился. Уточним, что в настоящее время он находится под подпиской о невыезде.
Его родственники, в число которых входит и так называемый правозащитник Магомед Хазбиев, развернули «план спасения» Илеза Нальгиева и его шефа Назира Гулиева. Кстати родственником Гулиева является глава республики Юнус-бек Евкуров.
(Справка: люди, которые будучи сотрудниками правоохранительных органов, сделали инвалидами нескольких жителей Ингушетии, участвовали в фабрикациях уголовных дел и убийствах – внесудебных казнях парней, подозреваемых в участии в НВФ, в настоящее время находятся под подпиской о невыезде, и могут путем шантажа, подкупа и угроз влиять на ход следственного процесса)
С целью оттянуть судебное заседание, обвиняемый Нальгиев отказывается от адвоката, так как без адвоката подсудимого судебное заседание проведено быть не может.
Затем, при помощи правозащитника Магомеда Хазбиева, Нальгиев и Гулиев подключили грузинский канал ПИК, в котором все трое – Гулиев, Нальгиев и Хазбиев робко обвиняют руководителя Ингушетии Юнус-Бека Евкурова в хищении нефти кланом Евкуровых, утверждая, что именно из-за разборок с нефтехищением на них «повешали» уголовное дело.
В эту же ночь, после «разоблачительного» интервью, в аккурат перед заседанием, где Нальгиева должны были увезти в наручниках, на него якобы было совершено покушение. В результате взрыва у ворот дома, в момент когда он подходил к ним, Нальгиев был увезен в якобы критическом состоянии в реанимационное отделение ИРКБ.
Никакого покушения не было! Была инсценировка. Не было также никаких тяжких телесных повреждений, Нальгиев получил лишь незначительные царапины. Используя родственные связи, его положили в реанимацию ИРКБ. Родственники и пособники Нальгиева хотели на реанимобиле вывезти его в эту же ночь за пределы республики. Но это им не удалось, пока нет информации по каким причинам.
Что касается Магомеда Хазбиева, участвовавшего в операции по прикрытию нечисти, исключили с альтернативного ингушского парламента Мехк-Кхелл из-за его амбиций и пустословия.
Теперь же, после того, как Хазбиев попытался подтасовать факты, выступил в защиту преступников и убийц мирных людей, является нерукопожатным человеком.
И в конце добавлю, что факт совершения зверских пыток над Зелемханом Читиговым сотрдниками правоохранительных органов Назиром Гулиевым, Илезом Нальгиевым, другими сотрудниками Карабулкского ГОВД и руководителем центра «Э» Баширом Толдиевым, не перестает быть. Виновные в преступлениях будут наказаны.
Зелемхан Оздоев

Обвиняемые Гулиев и Нальгиев пытаются придать своему делу политическое звучание

Светлана Ганнушкина

По мне, все средства хороши отныне:
Я так уже увяз в кровавой тине,
Что легче будет мне вперед шагать,
Чем по трясине возвращаться вспять.
Вильям Шекспир. «Макбет»

Эти слова Макбета вспомнились мне, когда 12 января на сайте Первого Информационного Кавказского (ПИК) телеканала я увидела три говорящие головы и прослушала то, что сказала первая из них. Назир Гулиев – бывший начальник ОВД г. Карабулак Республики Ингушетия, – с трудом подбирая слова, рассказал, как ему была поручена охрана нефти, но закончилась его миссия возбуждением против него уголовного дела. Дело это, по словам бывшего полицейского, придумано, чтобы скрыть хищения нефти, в которых, как он намекал, виновны глава Республики Ингушетия Юнус-Бек Евкуров и его брат Увайс.

И это говорит Назир Гулиев? Тот самый Гулиев, который все время так кичился своей близостью к Евкуровым? Который ровно за четыре месяца до своего «эксклюзивного» интервью ПИК, перед началом слушаний по его с Нальгиевым делу без стука вошел в кабинет судьи и спросил, не звонил ли ей сам глава Республики. На первых заседаниях суда Гулиев держался самоуверенно и нагло, прерывал потерпевших и свидетелей и на обращенный к нему вопрос адвоката потерпевшего ответил вопросом, обращенным к судье: «Она кто такая? Почему мне вопросы задает?»

Сразу подумалось, что неожиданный поворот в позиции Гулиева едва ли придумал он сам.

Вторая голова принадлежала бывшему заместителю Гулиева, Илезу Нальгиеву, который также заявил, что при Евкурове в Ингушетии «правды никогда не будет», а на скамью подсудимых он попал исключительно из-за разборок по поводу нефти.

И, наконец, заговорила голова Магомеда Хазбиева, названного в этом материале правозащитником. Похоже было, что именно ему принадлежала замечательная мысль превратить громкое дело двух милиционеров-беспредельщиков в политическое и использовать его для «борьбы с режимом». Хазбиев заявил, что на бедняг Нальгиева и Гулиева льется грязь исключительно из-за нефтяного спора. О своем участии в деле Хазбиев сказал так: «Я сам только пару недель вмешался в эту ситуацию и завтра сам поеду на этот процесс».

Дело Нальгиева и Гулиева не имеет никакого отношения к охране нефти от хищения: пытки и произвол, учиненные ими, никак с нефтью не связаны.

ПИК назвал свой материал так: «Дело Читигова – эксклюзивное интервью каналу ПИК». Дело двух подсудимых Гулиева и Нальгиева авторы материала называют именем Читигова – одного из потерпевших по их делу. При этом Гулиев по эпизоду с Читиговым к ответственности не привлекается, а в деле есть еще 13 потерпевших. Исключительное внимание к одному из них объясняется просто: эпизод, по которому Зелимхан Читигов признан потерпевшим, – самый чудовищный в деле Нальгиева-Гулиева. Нальгиев по этому эпизоду фактически обвиняется в пытках. Это обвинение не просто в превышении должностных полномочий (ст. 286 УК РФ), но и в умышленном нанесении тяжкого вреда здоровью (ст. 111).

Только невероятное мужество позволило Зелимхану Читигову выдержать зверства Илеза Нальгиева и его подручных. Плиев, которого Нальгиев упоминает как признавшего свою и Зелимхана вину в терроризме, давно на свободе. По обвинению в терроризме он был оправдан, признал только то, что хранил оружие. Выйдя на свободу, Плиев дал показания, в которых сообщил, что не выдержал пыток и оговорил себя и Зелимхана. Все эти данные подтверждаются в идущем сейчас судебном процессе.

Почему ПИК, очень часто обращающийся за комментарием ко мне и другим сотрудникам «Мемориала», не сделал этого на сей раз? Захотелось горячего разоблачительного эксклюзива? Почему не посмотрели журналисты этого канала публикации своих коллег и сообщения правозащитников? Их множество. См., например:,,, ,

Прочитав приведенные выше материалы, легко убедиться, что все откровения Гулиева и Нальгиева о давлении на Читигова и заказном деле против них не стоят ломаного гроша. Такой, с позволения сказать, «эксклюзив» – позор для средства массовой информации, а поэтому и сделанные им «разоблачения» руководства РИ стоят не больше того же гроша.

А теперь попробуем понять, что имел в виду Хазбиев, когда говорил, что вмешался в ситуацию, – как он вмешался и почему так и не попал на очередные слушанья по делу своих соавторов по приданию политического звучания уголовному делу, важному именно тем, что оно – единственное из подобных дел, дошедшее до суда.

Появлению троицы разоблачителей 12 января на канале ПИК предшествовало другое событие, в котором принял активное участие Магомед Хазбиев.

Вечером 11 января в дом в с. Плиево к старшему брату матери Зелимхана Читигова Хамзату Гарданову явились Хазбиев, Хашагульгов и Нальгиевы. По словам Хамзата, он принял эту делегацию в своем доме только из уважения к своему соседу Хашагульгову. Пришедшие просили дядю Зелимхана повлиять на него и уговорить забрать заявление. Видимо, они имели в виду, что Зелимхан и его мать Зухра должны изменить в суде свои показания. Хамзат категорически отказался обсуждать подобную возможность и просил непрошеных гостей удалиться, сказав, что не поверит в невиновность Нальгиева, даже если тот, как он предлагает, поклянется на Коране. В ответ так называемый правозащитник Магомед Хазбиев обещал Хамзату разобраться с его семьей по-вайнахски.

Затем события развивались следующим образом. 12 января на ПИКе появился упомянутый лживый «эксклюзив», который вряд ли можно отнести к вайнахским традициям. А в половине второго ночи, как позже рассказала жена Нальгиева, кто-то телефонным звонком вызвал ее мужа во двор, прозвучал взрыв, в результате которого Нальгиев оказался в реанимации. И уже через час сообщение об этом появилось на на сайте «Ингушения.ру», редактируемом Магомедом Хазбиевым. Завидная оперативность!

Как тут не предположить, что все эти события – составляющие единого плана по спасению карабулакской парочки от справедливого возмездия?! Судя по политическому акценту, план этот не принадлежит «доблестным борцам с расхитителями нефти».

Нечего и говорить, что судебное заседание по делу, еще далекому от завершения, было отложено. Так Магомеду Хазбиеву и не удалось послушать свидетелей, которые видели Зелимхана после пыток. А было бы это нашему правозащитнику и борцу за правду весьма полезно. Он узнал бы, как в январе 2011 года Зелимхана Читигова привезли в Москву в инвалидной коляске с диагнозом, из которого следовало, что он никогда из нее не сможет ходить. Травма позвоночника, ушиб спинного мозга, посттравматическая киста головного мозга, перфорация барабанной перепонки, гнойный отит, тревожно-фобический синдром – и это не весь список последствий четырех дней общения молодого чеченца с теми, кто сейчас просит его изменить показания. «У больного отсутствует разговорная речь, и больной не может самостоятельно передвигаться», – гласила последняя фраза медицинского заключения ингушских врачей от июня 2010 года. Случилось чудо – врачи московской больницы имени Боткина поставили Зелимхана на ноги. Его речь и интеллектуальные способности полностью восстановились. Однако перенесенные пытки нанесли непоправимый вред его здоровью. И чтобы с другими не произошло того же, виновные в истязаниях должны быть наказаны.

Врачи говорят, что Илез Нальгиев скоро выйдет из больницы. По их словам, он чувствует себя неплохо, чему нельзя не порадоваться. Установить, откуда ему поступил звонок, при теперешней технике ничего не стоит. И пусть свершится правосудие.

В заключение мне хочется привести некоторые цифры. На Северном Кавказе в целом потери среди сотрудников правоохранительных органов в 2011 году по сравнению с 2009 годом уменьшились в два раза. При этом в Ингушетии число нападений на силовиков уменьшилось в восемь раз. Этот успех свидетельствует о том, что население постепенно перестает ожидать только насилия и унижения от тех, кто обязан его защищать. Единственной гарантией сохранения таких тенденций может быть справедливый суд, выносящий законные и обоснованные приговоры.