Archivi tag: Ikhvan Gerikhanov

Memories of Budennovsk: Francesco Benedetti interviews Ikhvan Gerikhanov

Mr. Gerikhanov , your intervention in the Budennovsk hostage crisis begins on the evening of June 15, 1995, when you reach the city hospital, occupied by Basayev’s men, with the intention of starting negotiations. The task had been assigned to her by the Minister for Nationalities of the Russian Federation, Mikhailov. Do you remember how you responded to his request? Were you able to communicate with ChRI authorities from the time you were called to the hospital until you entered the hospital?

That’s essentially how it went. As chairman of the Constitutional Court , I had no contact with the leadership of the Chechen Republic, and was busy reporting on the war crimes that were taking place on the territory of our republic. I have personally held dozens of international conferences and roundtables, in which I have called for the intervention of the world community to stop the destruction of the Chechen people as an ethnic group!

At the time I was in Moscow, as an expert in the session of the International Tribunal for war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Chechen Republic, headed by State Duma Deputy Galina Starovoitova, later killed due to her civil engagement on the events in Chechnya. While I was at work, I was approached by one of my compatriots who held a responsible position in the presidential administration of the Russian Federation. He was looking for me at the request of the Minister for Nationalities, Mikhailov, who asked for my assistance in freeing the hostages held in Budennovsk. Naturally, I accepted the assignment, aware of the moral responsibility I had for these facts, as a senior official of the republic.

First of all, I interpreted my mission as that of allowing the hostages to understand the reason for this armed incursion, and to explain to them that they were not “militants”, as reported by all the world’s media, but defenders of their homeland.

Two or three days after I received the request, I was on a plane bound for Grozny, on which was also a delegation from the Russian Liberal Democratic Party, headed by Zhirinovsky. We had no contact with them, but the departure of the plane from Moscow was delayed for several hours.

Ikhvan Gerikhanov waits in front of an entrance to the Budennovsk hospital manned by one of Basayev’s men

Together with her were other Chechen officials. Who were they? And why did you choose them?

With me . were Paskushev and D. Khangoshvili . The second is a Georgian Chechen. Neither was an official of the state structure of the republic. I didn’t choose them, we just happened to be together. In fact I was not the head of the delegation. The other two simply knew my position among the authorities of the republic, and they recognized me as a sort of “primacy” in relation to the responsibility of my work. Unfortunately Khangoshvili passed away a week ago. Paskushev remained at headquarters in the Ministry of Internal Affairs building to ensure our safety.

I take this opportunity to express my special gratitude to my comrades for their courage and perseverance in these events. We were exposed to mortal danger of being shot in the rear by the Russian army, or by a sniper, or of being shot by our own if the military’s provocations ended with the assault on the hospital.

Did you personally know Basayev before Budennovsk? What opinion did you have of him? And how has it changed after the seizure of the hospital?

Before these events I had never had personal contact with him, as a Member of Parliament on first call and President of the Constitutional Court I was busy with my duties.

My opinion on this raid is still ambiguous today, I am against violence against civilians, although dozens of times we Chechens have seen how Russian troops put groups of civilians in front of them and went on the attack. But war is war , there are no rules of engagement and no one chooses the methods. This was mutually evident when civilians were killed by carpet bombing on the territory of the republic and filter camps were set up, where ordinary civilians, both women and men, were tortured, raped and killed.

The indifference of the absolute majority of Russian citizens and the world community gave the following result: our soldiers were forced to attract everyone’s attention in this way, to stop the destruction of the Chechens on a national basis. By the way, to this day the participants of Basayev’s raid are “found guilty” and sentenced to the maximum sentence, while not a single officer or soldier of the Russian army, except for the freak and rapist Budanov, has been held responsible for the criminal acts made on the territory of our republic.

This raid, with its pitiable innocent victims, produced results: the war was stopped and the Khasavyurt Accords on the cessation of hostilities and the beginning of peace negotiations were signed.

After landing in Budennovsk and reaching the hospital, you made contact with the Chechen units barricaded in the facility. Your first request to talk to Basayev, however, was turned down. Aslambek Ismailov, clarified that there would be no negotiations. Why do you think Basayev reacted so harshly? Didn’t he recognize you as a senior ChRI official? And speaking of Ismailov, did you know him before the Budennovsk events?

Before our arrival in Budennovsk, Basayev made it clear to everyone that there would be no negotiations before the withdrawal of the Russian army from the territory of our republic and that negotiations with Dudayev for the recognition of independence should begin. To all delegations, including one composed of Basayev’s relatives, he made it clear that he would not speak to anyone, and that any attempt to force the situation would lead to the death of the hostages.

After arriving at the Headquarters, headed by Russian Deputy Prime Minister Egorov, I informed everyone about the purpose of my visit and after long discussions I called the hospital directly to explain that my intention was to visit the building where the hostages were being held. Since it was night, I resolved to enter the building the next morning. Ismailov, Basayev’s deputy, answered me. I had never met him before. He knew me, he knew I was a high official of the republic. He promised to tell Basayev what I was proposing, and to give me an answer within a few hours.

To get an affirmative answer, I had to declare that I was willing to remain inside the hospital together with the hostages and Basayev’s men if my efforts to resolve the crisis were unsuccessful.

June 18 , you finally managed to enter the hospital, leading two different groups inside the facility and starting negotiations to open an exit corridor for Basayev’s men, in exchange for the release of a certain number of hostages. How did these negotiations take place? Why do you think Basayev changed his attitude towards you?

My first contact was on June 16 , when Khangoshvili and Ismailov met at the hospital entrance. Before our arrival a sniper had shot one of Basayev’s men, and his corpse was still lying in plain sight, covered in blood, at a distance of 1.5 – 2 meters. To avoid risking the same end, we met on the entrance stairway, sheltered from snipers. After a short conversation with Ismailov, we parted. On the same day he contacted the General Headquarters informing those present that Basayev was available to meet the President of the Constitutional Court of the Chechen Republic.

Women and children hostages are freed during the negotiations.

What situation did you find in the hospital? Do you remember the conditions of the hostages and militants during your stay in the facility?

The situation was very tense, there were many women and children, some wounded, mothers who had just given birth. With respect to this, the Russian media presented a distorted version of reality: with the exception of military pilots and police officers, the hostages were shown respect and care, relative to the conditions in which they found themselves. The hostages themselves had spread white scarves and sheets outside the windows to prevent an assault by the Russian army. I saw a woman, a doctor from the hospital, slap a police lieutenant general who was saying that Basayev’s team was putting women and children against the windows!

Khangoshvili and I have been to the hospital 5-6 times until June 18th , and each time we came back with several children, who we returned to their mothers. They persuaded me to take the children with me, referring to the fact that Basayev would not object and that the children would be saved. On our next visit, we heard the voices of the women talking to each other saying that there was a “mustachioed prosecutor” and that another group of children needed to be rounded up.

According to press reports, it was you who developed the text of the agreement that led to the resolution of the crisis. Do you remember the genesis of this document? Were there discussions about what should be written on it? Do you keep a copy of this document?

Yes, I wrote that text. At the first meeting with Basayev he recognized my rank as an official, but said that he was accountable to his command, and that without the approval of his bosses he would not take any decision. Basayev insisted that the withdrawal of Russian troops from Chechnya and the republic’s independence could not be negotiated. His detachment would not have left if these two conditions were not met. If necessary they would all have sacrificed their lives for this. I had to talk to all the members of Basayev’s team to explain to them that at this stage of the conflict, fulfilling both conditions would be impossible, even with the sacrifice of all Chechens on earth.

In the end, thanks to the help of the witnesses I brought, and the arguments of my reasoning, I managed to persuade Basayev that the withdrawal of troops and the opening of negotiations would be real steps towards ending the war and recognizing Chechen sovereignty . After another visit to the hospital on June 17 , Basayev finally declared that he was ready to open a dialogue on this basis, and asked me to draft a document. To the above conditions he added the request for a guarantee of safety for his men, so that they could return to Chechnya without incident. Finally, he reminded me that, as a Chechen, I would answer to the people and to Allah if the Russian military and political leadership did not abide by the agreements.

The text was signed by responsible persons. I was asked to sign as head of the Chechen delegation, but I refused because I was a state official. However, having to identify a guarantor among the Chechens, I asked Kanghoshvili to sign, since the Russian government would not accept my signature as an official of the Chechen Republic.

The main concern for me and for Basayev was: who would guarantee the free passage of the buses on which the Chechen fighters and their escorts would leave? Knowing the insidious behavior of the Russian military and leadership, when I returned to the HQ I asked on my own initiative that this guarantee be given by the Russian Prime Minister Chernomyrdin: without his direct intervention, Basayev’s men would not have left the building, and they would have agreed to fight to the death. All those present reacted with anger: Deputy Prime Minister Yegorov , FSB director Stephasin and other military commanders invited me to leave. To which, brusquely, I told them that if they stormed the hospital, the whole world would immediately know about it from me, and the death of the hostages would remain on their conscience!

While returning to Moscow with the Chechen delegation, the human rights activist, S. Kovalev, approached us, and told us that Chernomyrdin was willing to talk with us about the guarantees to be given to Basayev’s men. I replied that this shouldn’t have been behind the scenes, but that it should have been an official statement. I then demanded that the Prime Minister speak to Basayev directly on the phone, and threatened to abandon the negotiations, and to return to my job if the conversation did not take place.

When you left the hospital, you took about a hundred hostages with you. Do you remember any of them? Were you able to exchange a few words between you? What did the hostages think about what was happening?

As I said, after I learned that Chernomyrdin would call Basayev, I returned to the hospital on June 18th . Arriving from Basayev I asked him: if the Prime Minister provides a guarantee of safe passage to Chechnya, will this be a sufficient basis for the release of the hostages? Basayev and his men laughed: they didn’t believe such a guarantee would be possible. However Kovalev and the accompanying State Duma deputies confirmed my words, so we added this clause to the agreement, and signed it. I asked Basayev to give a sign of good will by handing over, together with the request for agreement, at least 100 hostages, including women and children, to be released. Basayev agreed to the request the next day.

Upon your departure, Basayev reportedly warned you: “Remember that you are a Chechen. If even a single hair falls from my fighters’ heads along the way, your whole family will answer for it!” Does this mean you got involved in a family feud to save the Budennovsk hostages?

Naturally this was a provocation on Basayev’s part. After all, I could not vouch for their free passage through Russian territory. Knowing about Yeltsin’s intention to show himself to the world community as a fighter against “terrorists”, I nipped in the bud another provocation thought up by the head of the operation to free the hostages, General Yerin . As soon as I arrived in Moscow, I gave several interviews to Russian and foreign journalists in which I feared a possible military provocation against Basayev’s detachment on the way back.

After signing the agreement, on your way home, you were abruptly called back at Aslambek ‘s explicit request Abdulkhadzhiev . The feds had asked all those who had joined Basayev on the return journey to sign a document that effectively exempted the Russian authorities from any responsibility in the event of accidents on the way back. It was a tacit admission of a willingness to raid Basayev’s convoy as soon as it entered Chechnya. Abdulkhadzhiev stated that without your intervention the negotiations would not have resumed. Did you know him? Why was your presence deemed necessary?

I have already mentioned General Yerin , the author of this receipt stating that such and such a person “voluntarily joins Shamil Basayev’s group…”. Abdulkhadzhiev reacted urgently to this provocation and declared that without a conversation with the President of the Constitutional Court of the Republic, the agreement would not proceed.

A car caught up with us on the way to the airport, and we were asked to come back. Upon arrival in Budennovsk, after reading the text proposed by General Yerin , I asked to speak urgently with Chernomyrdin and, after my explanations, Chernomyrdin slipped through Yerin , scolded him about the receipt and ordered him to cancel it. It later became known that the General was preparing an assault on Basayev’s convoy on orders from President Yeltsin, who was outside Russia at the time. Indeed, an attempted assault took place near the Chechen border, at the height of Kurskaya , when military helicopters began flying over the buses. However, due to the great attention these events caused and the presence of many foreign journalists, the attack did not take place.

Hostages leave the hospital

After resolving this second crisis, you were faced with the frustrated reaction of the Russian military and civilians who had witnessed the kidnapping. Why were they mad at you? What made them so nervous?

The answer in this case is unequivocal. Many soldiers wanted to destroy Basayev’s detachment and gain prestige. They didn’t care about the hostages and their punishments at the time. On our next visit to the hospital we realized that the army’s special units clearly wanted to take advantage of the stalemate in operations due to the negotiation process to storm the hospital. And the police major’s snide comment: You can’t come here, you’re no better than the terrorists you sent home I assumed I never expected the most basic humanity or gratitude from these people.

After Basayev’s return to Chechnya, your mission was over. Were you able to contact Dudayev, or another official of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria?

Unfortunately no, I was very busy with the international tribunal, and until 1996 I was unable to return to the republic. According to Abdulkhadzhiev , in the presence of Ismailov and Basayev, my actions in this mission were highly appreciated by the President, who said that at the first meeting with me he would present me with the Republic’s highest award, the “Honor of the Nation ”. Unfortunately, the infamous assassination of the President of the Chechen Republic prevented us from meeting on this earth.

Did the Russian authorities give you any credit for ending the Budennovsk hostage crisis?

First of all, I didn’t expect anything from gold and I didn’t work for them. I only accepted the offer to participate in this matter, in good faith, because I was one of the highest officials of the Republic. Secondly, I did what I did out of civic duty, and I am grateful to the Almighty for giving me the opportunity to be of service to my people and to free more than 1200 hostages who were not involved in hostilities, like dozens of thousands of civilians in Chechnya, who suffered the most from the presence of the Russian army.

It was said a long time ago that I was offered an apartment in Moscow. Speculation around this topic was a useless farce of the Russian leadership, just as some newly emerged “patriots” among the Chechens could be accused of treason, who even today cannot understand and evaluate my actions as Chairman of the Constitutional Court of the Republic Chechen. But that’s another topic!

The Budennovsk crisis allowed the Chechen government to conclude a truce which proved useful in winning the war. However, it has cast a shadow of terror on the resistance. How do you think Budennovsk changed the history of independent Chechnya?

Today the whole world has known the face of the Russian Empire and has finally understood that the war of the aggressor, launched against our republic, was the beginning of perfidy and contempt for all norms and principles of international law, so as well as its obligations to the world community. The Budennovsk events forced the Russian leadership to sit down at the negotiating table, and this saved tens of thousands of lives, both on the territory of our republic and in Russia itself.

As for the “shadow of terror”, state terror was declared against the Chechen people by Russia, exclusively on a national basis, and has not stopped to this day, even though the peace treaty with the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria was signed a long time ago! So who is guilty of terrorism? Who is the terrorist?

Thank God the European community has already declared Russia a sponsor of terrorism. This is mine answer at the your last question !

Text of the agreement drawn up by Gerikhanov.


The document, translated for us by Inna Kurochkina, says:

Agreed text for the time 10 hours 40 minutes 18.06.95.

On the release of the hostages, the city of Budyonnovsk.

Commitment:

-On the part of the Government of the Russian Federation represented by the Prime Minister

V.S. Chernomyrdin:

Immediately stop hostilities and bombardments of the territory of Chechnya.

All other issues, including the disengagement of troops, should be resolved exclusively by personal means on the basis of the negotiation process.

The person authorized to negotiate with the Chechen side is Usman Imaev.

-From Shamil Basayev:

Release of hostages, with the exception of the security assurance team.

Time of completion:

Statement by Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation Chernomyrdin.

The release of the hostages in the amount of one hundred people Sh. Basaev immediately after the speech of Viktor Chernomyrdin.

The rest, with the exception of the security guarantee group, are released during the time for the security of the departure of Sh. Basayev’s group.

18.06.95

10 hours 03 minutes

Signatures:

Viktor Stepanivich Chernomyrdin

Shamil Basaev

From the Government of the Russian Federation on behalf of Viktor Chernomyrdin: Head of

the Delegation Sergey Kovalev

From the Administration of the Stavropol Kraj Member of the delegation Sergey Popov

Deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation Yuliy Rybakov

From the side of the Chechen diaspora Khangoshvili Dzhabrail

Federation Council Deputy Viktor Kurochkin

Assistant to Kovalev Oleg Orlov “Memorial”

Amendments to the first document

The document, translated for us by Inna Kurochkina, says:

Additional agreements to the text of the Agreement dated June 18, 1995.

The delegation of the Russian Federation and Shamil Basayev’s group agreed on the following:

All questions of a political settlement, including the question of the status of the Republic of Chechnya, its relations with the federal authorities of the Russian Federation, and the republics of the Russian Federation, and other issues, should be resolved exclusively by peaceful means, on the basis of international legal acts, legislation and agreements reached in the negotiations.

This procedure should be the subject of consideration by authorized officials of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria and representatives of the Government and the Federal Assembly of

the Russian Federation.

18.06.95

11 hours 03 minutes

Signatures

Shamil Basaev

From the side of the Chechen diaspora Khangoshvili Dzhabrail

From the delegation of the Russian Federation:

Sergey Kovalev

Juliy Rybakov (Deputy of the State Duma)

Viktor Kurochkin (Member of the Federal Assembly)

Oleg Orlov (“Memorial”)

From the Administration of the Stavropol Kraj Sergey Popov

Back to the Constitution: Francesco Benedetti interviews Ikhvan Gerikhanov (Part 2)

In April 21, 1996, President Dudayev was killed, and Vice-President Yandarbiev assumed his interim powers. How did your relationship with him develop?

After the treasonous assassination of the President, I returned to Grozny and actively participated in the preparation of the new elections. I returned to my duties when President Yandarbiev accepted my condition that the Constitutional Court could begin its work only after the annulment of the unconstitutional decree concerning its dissolution in April 1993. This happened with the Decree from these promulgated on November 12, 1996, in which it was clarified that the dissolution order issued by Dudaev was to be considered devoid of any legal effect. At that point I started forming a new team of judges for the court, having to make up for the expressed refusal of some of the old members to collaborate with the new government, as well as the defections of others, who had left the territory of the Republic.

During his mandate, Yandarbiev initiated a series of legislative interventions aimed at establishing an Islamic republic, such as, for example, the creation of Sharia courts. Were these measures constitutionally correct? Has the Constitutional Court sanctioned them?


To take a specific decision on the introduction of Sharia courts, the Constitutional Court did not yet have the necessary quorum for a vote and the approval of the judges was and is the prerogative of the Parliament of the Chechen Republic, which during this period had not yet been renewed. Actions aimed at introducing Sharia courts directly contradict the Constitution of the Chechen Republic, which I have repeatedly expressed in the media and personally to Yandarbiev.

Zelimkhan Yandarbiev


Following the January 1997 presidential elections, Aslan Maskhadov became president. How was your work under his tenure?


After the election of President and of the Parliament, I have actively collaborated with the institutions and have looked for candidates to complete the ranks of the Constitutional Court , and obtain their nomination by the Parliament. However I failed to complete this task, due to the situation in the Republic and the introduction of Sharia courts. However, as head of the highest judicial authority, I have actively participated in all legal activities of national importance.

By Presidential Decree of May 6 , 1996, I was appointed an expert in the process of negotiating and drafting documents on relations between the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria and the Russian Federation, and also headed the office of the State Legal Commission to develop and improve the constitutional principles , with the creation of a code of Islamic law CHRI. This order was presented to the President on May 20, 1997. This code of laws was personally prepared by me and delivered to President Maskhadov under the name ” Korta Nizam “, meaning “main consensus”: this project included the combination of Muslim and secular law, without radical deviations from the mentality and customs ( adat ) of the Chechen people, but taking into account the rules of conduct for a Muslim according to the Koran and the Sunnah of our Prophet (SAS). This law should have been voted on in a referendum and subsequently should have been adopted by the Parliament. If the Chechen people had approved this bill, after it was adopted by its legislative body, it would have acquired the status of Constitution as Basic Law of the country.However, once again, the crisis of the institutions has not allowed this to be discussed, and possibly integrated into the Fundamental Law of the State.

In addition to this, I was involved in the work as a member of the State Commission for the Development of the National Security Doctrine of the CRI, according to the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of July 31, 1997. Basically, we worked on guarantees for the country’s national security and so that the invasion of our country would not be repeated over the decades. We have tried to establish ChRI in the world community as a subject of international law and find protection through international institutions. In addition, we have worked on consolidating our statehood through the Charter of the United Nations, which should be the document guaranteeing our security, both as a state and as a whole and as an ethnic group in communion with the whole civilized world. Constitutional Court member Seda Khalidova worked actively with me. In 1997 we met with the new Chairman of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation M. Baglai and even prepared an agreement on the interaction of the two highest state judicial bodies. This draft agreement was not approved by the parties, for the well-known reasons we have already mentioned.

As the radical forces consolidated in the country, the possibility of creating an Islamic state was increasingly discussed. How could this idea fit into the 1992 Constitution?


In no way. The Constitution of the CRI and its norms are mandatory, i.e. mandatory, regardless of the situation, if changes to individual articles of the Constitution have not been made in accordance with the requirements of this Basic Law.

At the end of 1998, Maskhadov was tried by the Sharia court. Was this court constitutionally legal? Do you remember this process?

By that time I had left the republic and worked at the International Arbitration Tribunal, but as one of the authors of the 1992 Constitution of the Chechen Republic, I can state that such a decision grossly violates the requirements of the Constitution of the Chechen Republic!

How did your experience as President of the Constitutional Court ended?

I resigned in March 1998, after an unconstitutional vote of no confidence in the President of the Constitutional Court of the Chechen Republic, ie in me, for my position against the introduction of Sharia courts and the use of public executions. In the Parliament of the CRI on the second convocation there were deputies who had their own candidates for the post of President of the Tribunal and, frankly, had their own mercantile interests, which under my leadership they could not have realized. Moreover, the very discussion regarding the issue of mistrust of me is an unconstitutional process, if I have not committed a crime or if, for health reasons, I cannot fulfill my duties, or I have committed other actions contrary to the ideas of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the state, prescribed by the law “On the activities of the Constitutional Court of the Chechen Republic”, adopted in 1992.

This question was initiated by two deputies, one of whom, as it was later established, worked for the FSB of Russia. The second deputy brought his name into disrepute during the proceedings of the first convocation Parliament. Their names are known and they, being refugees in Europe, continue to harm the legitimate authorities of the CRI.

Chechnya, 1997: Religious police impose corporal punishment for drunkenness

After the start of the Second Russo-Chechen War and Russia’s second invasion of the country, martial law was introduced in the CRI. Aslan Maskhadov’s mandate would have expired in February 2002, but he remained in office until his assassination in 2005. If you recall, what measure extended his mandate up to this point?

First of all, we must proceed from the fact that the President of the CRI, in accordance with the requirements of the Constitution of the CRI, declared martial law in connection with the invasion of the aggressor into the sovereign territory of the country.

Secondly, in connection with martial law and the purpose of centralized government, the chairman of the CRI, Aslan Maskhadov, issued a decree on October 5, 1999 on the introduction of martial law on the territory of the republic and the adoption of Annex No . 1 to it, according to which all state structures were subordinated to the established State Defense Committee (GKO), with the wording that ” all authorities stop their work of norm-setting “. Furthermore, the State Defense Committee, since martial law was declared, has been approved as ” the highest collegial body of state power…”. And with resolution no. 217, adopted at the same time, by decision of the GKO, the President of the CRI was endowed with additional powers corresponding to the highest legislative and executive power!

Thus, the chairman of the CRI, Aslan Maskhadov, as the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the CRI and the head of the country’s State Defense Committee, during this wartime period could not and had no legal right to leave this post and remained in place until his treasonous assassination by Russian punishers.

After Maskhadov’s assassination, power passed to Vice President Abdul Khalim Sadulayev. Was such a transfer of power constitutionally acceptable?

Of course, and this right is enshrined in art. 75 of the Constitution of the Chechen Republic, which provides that in case of removal from office of the President or in other cases in which the President cannot perform his duties, the Vice-President is required to assume full powers.

After the assassination of Sadulaev , power passed to Dokku Umarov , who proclaimed himself President. There appear to be differences between the Maskhadov-Sadulayev succession and the Sadulayev- Umarov power . What do you think is the difference between these two phenomena?

I don’t see much difference, since CRI president Abdul- Khalim Sadulaev , by decree dated June 2, 2005, appointed Umarov Doku as Vice President of the CRI. As it was indicated above, the State Defense Committee is the only state authority for the period of martial law in the country, and such actions to transfer powers do not go beyond the legislation of the CRI, although they are of a temporary nature, until the end of war and the lifting of the state of emergency.

In October 2007, Umarov announced the dissolution of the CRI as part of the Caucasus Emirate. Is this process unconstitutional?

These actions grossly violate the requirements of the Constitution of the CRI and are criminally punishable as liquidation of the state system and its power structures!

Dokku Umarov (center) last President of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria and founder of the Caucasus Emirate


A few months after the birth of the Caucasus Emirate, the current Chairman of the Cabinet of Ministers, Akhmed Zakayev, was elected to his current position by still capable deputies. How did this nomination come about? Was it constitutionally correct?

This process can be explained at length and it is impossible to complete it in this interview due to its large volume in the description. There is my October 10, 2020 Expert Opinion [attached at the bottom of this interview, NDR], made at the request of the Council of Elders of Europe, which has done a great job of consolidating disparate structures, as each of them it is declared a legitimate authority in accordance with the Constitution of the CRI. During this period, I was not a member of any diaspora or power group, so I conducted a thorough analysis and evaluation of the requirements of the Constitution of the CRI, as one of its authors and a scientist in the field of jurisprudence, and concluded that the CRI government in exile is a legitimate state authority of the CRI.

Is it true that in 2002 all powers were transferred to the GKO and that so far the institutional power of the CRI derives from the decisions of this committee, now renamed the State Deoccupation Commitee?

Yes, it is this structure that continues to have the status of the only state authority of the CRI, as the successor to the State Defense Committee, represented by the State Deoccupation Commitee of the annexed territory by the Russian Armed Forces and their protégés.

From the point of view of constitutional law, can the current CRI authorities represented by the Cabinet of Ministers, chaired by Akhmed Zakaev , recognize themselves as legitimate?

Yes, and this does not contradict the requirements of the Constitution of the CRI, and proof of this is the fact that it was approved by the legal successor of the state power of the CRI – the State Deoccupation Commitee. A detailed analysis of the legitimacy of the Cabinet of Ministers of the CRI is contained in the opinion of 10.10.2020.

DAI TRIBUNALI ALLE CORTI ISLAMICHE: IL SISTEMA GIUDIZIARIO IN ICHKERIA (SECONDA PARTE, 1992 – 1994)

LOTTE DI POTERE

Tra il 1992 e il 1993 il cronicizzarsi dello scontro politico tra Presidente e Parlamento ed il proliferare di numerose strutture ed agenzie governative, ora fedeli all’una, ora all’altra autorità, misero in pericolo il lavoro dei magistrati. Questo stato di insicurezza era emerso fin dalle prime fasi della Rivoluzione Cecena: in un appello pubblicato sul giornale “Voce della Ceceno – Inguscezia” dell’Ottobre 1991, esponenti del sistema giudiziario lamentavano la perniciosa presenza di elementi fedeli al governo rivoluzionario, i quali tentavano di condizionare il lavoro di Giudici e Notai a vantaggio della loro causa, o a loro vantaggio personale, tentando di evitare di essere inquisiti o rifiutandosi di accettare il normale iter giudiziario previsto dalla legge. La cronica carenza di fondi e di spazi a disposizione dei tribunali rendeva complessa anche l’ordinaria amministrazione, ed a poco servì l’ordinanza numero 19 del 15 Marzo 1992 “Sulle misure volte a migliorare le condizioni di lavoro dei tribunali distrettuali e cittadini della Repubblica Cecena”, con il quale si raccomandava la concentrazione degli uffici e l’utilizzo di risorse, locali e mobilio di proprietà del disciolto Partito Comunista dell’Unione Sovietica (PCUS): il cronico ritardo nel pagamento degli stipendi e la carenza di risorse liquide impedì di fatto al sistema giudiziario di funzionare.

In ambito giudiziario l’acredine tra parlamentaristi e presidenzialisti raggiunse un livello tale che l’Assemblea Legislativa, allora guidata da Hussein Akhmadov, rifiutò le nomine proposte da Dudaev al Ministero della Giustizia. In particolare, si oppose alla nomina di Imaev, già Presidente del Comitato Nazionale per la Riforma Giuridica, giudicandolo inadatto al ruolo e troppo dichiaratamente allineato sulle posizioni del Presidente. Per tutta risposta, Dudaev estese i poteri del Comitato al punto da farli coincidere con quelli del Ministero della Giustizia, aggirando il veto parlamentare e lasciando il vecchio dicastero un contenitore vuoto. Con l’Ordine del Presidente della Repubblica numero 66 del 26 Agosto 1992 “Sulla registrazione statale degli atti normativi della Repubblica Cecena” il Comitato fu dotato del compito di certificare l’entrata in vigore degli atti normativi e delle loro successive modifiche, diventando a tutti gli effetti una sorta di “cancelleria dello Stato” non riconosciuta dal Parlamento.

Sostenitori del Presidente della Repubblica Dudaev in piazza durante la crisi istituzionale del 1993. In piedi sta tenendo un discorso il deputato dudaevita Isa Arsemikov.

Dalla fine del 1992 il confronto tra partito parlamentare e partito presidenziale divenne serrato, aprendo una crisi politica che paralizzò l’attività dello stato, nel comparto legislativo ed esecutivo ma anche in quello giudiziario. Contrariamente a quanto previsto dalla legge del 18 Novembre 1992, la quale prevedeva un cursus honorum interno alla magistratura per la nomina dei giudici, il ricorso alla clientela politica ed alla pressione dall’alto per l’investitura di questo o quel magistrato erano all’ordine del giorno. Dal Marzo del 1993 Dudaev chiese l’intervento della Corte Costituzionale, all’epoca presieduta da Ikhvan Gerikhanov, riguardo a una proposta di modifica costituzionale che avrebbe profondamente riformato lo Stato ceceno, attribuendo un gran numero di poteri al Presidente della Repubblica a scapito del Parlamento. Al rifiuto di questi di riconoscere legittimità a tale proposito, Dudaev non trovò altra via d’uscita se non quella di sopprimere tutte gli organi statali a lui ostili. Anche la stessa Corte Costituzionale finì nel mirino dei dudaeviti, ed il 28 Maggio 1993 il Presidente emise il decreto n° 45 “Sullo scioglimento della Corte Costituzionale della Repubblica Cecena”. Tramite questo decreto il Capo dello Stato abolì ogni attività di tale organo sul territorio della repubblica, motivando la scelta con la necessità di “prevenire una scissione nella società e” di conservare “L’autocrazia”. Tale decreto, palesemente incostituzionale, fu l’anticamera del colpo di stato che seguì pochi giorni dopo, il 4 Giugno 1993, con l’occupazione manu militari del parlamento, del consiglio cittadino di Grozny e delle altre strutture di potere, e lo scioglimento delle assemblee elettive.

Il Colpo di Stato dette a Dudaev ancor più mano libera nell’intromettersi nel sistema giudiziario. Per la verità questa tendenza era evidente fin dai primi giorni del suo governo, come testimoniato dal Decreto numero 34 del 25 Febbraio 1992 “Sull’esecuzione delle sentenze dei tribunali e delle corti arbitrali straniere nella Repubblica Cecena”, nella quale si diffidava i giudici a dare seguito a sentenze emesse da corti di paesi i quali non avevano riconosciuto la Repubblica Cecena o con i quali la Repubblica non avesse un qualche tipo di accordo. Questo decreto, emesso appena quattro mesi dopo l’entrata in carica di Dudaev, rendeva chiara la volontà del Presidente di utilizzare la Magistratura come arma coercitiva nei confronti dei governi stranieri e forzare il riconoscimento della Cecenia facendo leva sulla velata minaccia di trasformare il paese in un “Buco nero giudiziario”.  

Ikhvan Gerikhanov, Presidente della Corte Costituzionale, tentò di mediare il conflitto istituzionale tra Presidente e Parlamento, intervenendo nella primavera del 1993. Il suo intervento, tuttavia, non arginò le pretese di Dudaev, il quale il 28 Maggio sciolse la Corte Costituzionale, ed il 4 Giugno mise in atto un colpo di Stato militare.

per approfondire leggi “Libertà o Morte! Storia della Repubblica Cecena di Ichkeria”, acquistabile QUI)

AZIONE DI CONTRASTO AL CRIMINE

Uno dei problemi più gravi che il sistema giudiziario della Repubblica si trovò ad affrontare fu quello connesso alla proliferazione delle armi da fuoco, conseguente al saccheggio delle strutture militari sovietiche, all’esplosione del mercato nero ed alla costituzione di numerosi gruppi armati semi – legalizzati come reparti dell’esercito o società di sicurezza private. In questo senso uno dei primi provvedimenti di Dudaev non aiutava: il Decreto del 16 Dicembre 1991 “Sul diritto dei Cittadini della Repubblica Cecena ad acquistare e tenere armi da fuoco personali e sul diritto di portarle” riconosceva il diritto “sottratto durante il periodo totalitario” dei cittadini ad armarsi, recuperando così una antica tradizione ingiustamente soppressa. Probabilmente nella visione dudaevita questo era un buon compromesso per controllare il fenomeno, anziché vietarlo non avendo gli strumenti per farlo. Ma il risultato certamente era stata una “corsa sociale alle armi” che alimentava l’illegalità, paralizzando il lavoro dei tribunali. A sua volta la paralisi dei tribunali alimentava la paura della gente comune, la quale continuava ad armarsi per timore di non avere nessuna protezione dallo Stato.

La carenza di fondi e le paghe basse e insicure producevano un diffuso fenomeno di corruzione. Questa era già esplosa prima ancora che Dudaev desse il suo colpo di piccone alla giustizia con il commissariamento del Ministero e la calmierazione dei prezzi, che aveva privato la magistratura delle fonti economiche necessarie a sostentarsi, tanto che un decreto dell’8 gennaio il Parlamento invitava le autorità giudiziarie a perseguire i cittadini che si rifiutavano di riconoscere lo stato di diritto e tentavano di influenzare il lavoro delle corti. Ma anche questo decreto era privo di eseguibilità pratica e rimase sostanzialmente una dichiarazione. Nel 1992 appena il 12% dei crimini registrati nella repubblica furono oggetto di processo, e soltanto 327 colpevoli su 1204 furono condannati alla prigione. Il diffuso senso di impunità incoraggiava il ricorso al crimine, visto da molti come unica soluzione alla miseria dilagante, e da alcuni come una buona opportunità per fare soldi facili.

Le attività criminali divennero endemici, a partire dal florido mercato della contraffazione dei titoli di credito. Basti pensare che nel solo 1993, dei 9,4 miliardi di rubli in titoli di Stato contraffatti in Russia, ben 3,7 miliardi provenivano dalla Cecenia. Fiorì il contrabbando di merci e di droghe, ed il mercato delle armi di Grozny divenne il più grande mercato nero di tutta l’ex Unione Sovietica. Tra il 1992 e il 1994 vennero registrati 1354 attacchi a treni merci e passeggeri. Secondo i dati riportati dalle agenzie di stampa e dal Ministero degli Interni ceceno, alla sola stazione di Grozny della Ferrovia del Nord Caucaso, nel solo 1993, vennero attaccati 559 treni, saccheggiati circa 4.000 vagoni per un valore di circa 11,5 miliardi di rubli. Nei primi 8 mesi del 1994 vennero commessi 120 attacchi armati, che portarono al saccheggio di 1156 vagoni e 527 container, per oltre 11 miliardi di rubli di danni. Nel biennio 1992 – 1994 26 lavoratori delle ferrovie persero la vita in attacchi armati. 

Reparto di Polizia dei Trasporti della ChRI sfilano in un documentario della TV di Stato. Il crimine dilagante si abbattè in primo luogo sul trasporto ferroviario con saccheggi sistematici delle merci e ruberie ai passeggeri.

RIFORME DI FACCIATA E DIRITTO CONSUETUDINARIO

In sostanza vi era una notevole differenza tra quanto prodotto in termini legislativi dal Parlamento e dal Presidente, e la realtà quotidiana del paese. Sulla carta le istituzioni lavoravano alacremente al disegno di un nuovo sistema giudiziario. Di fatto, questo era paralizzato dalle lotte di potere interne, dalla carenza di disponibilità economica e dalla corruzione dilagante, tre fattori che rendevano lo Stato virtualmente impotente rispetto alle forze criminali che si stavano impadronendo del Paese.  Stante il collasso totale delle strutture giudiziarie pubbliche, la società iniziò a recuperare quelle forme di diritto consuetudinario in vigore presso le società islamiche chiamato Adat, una sorta di “codice civile non scritto” patrimonio degli anziani, tramandato di generazione in generazione. Ancorchè non riconosciuto dallo Stato, l’Adat iniziò a prendere campo soprattutto nella risoluzione di controversie di natura economica, per le quali era previsto il Tribunale Arbitrale, il quale tuttavia funzionava poco e male, e non riscuoteva la fiducia dei cittadini.

Del resto Dudaev aveva tentato di reintrodurre l’Adat nei livelli più bassi dell’amministrazione della giustizia. In particolare, con la ricostituzione del Mekhk  – Khel, il Consiglio degli Anziani, Dudaev puntava a ricostituire un sistema di arbitrato locale basato sul diritto consuetudinario. In questo senso il Consiglio degli Anziani fu ufficialmente riconosciuto come entità deputata al “controllo morale ed alla supervisione delle attività istituzionali” dall’articolo 12 della Legge sull’Attività del Parlamento della Repubblica Cecena, varata il 24/12/1991. Tale legge riconosceva il Mekhk -Khel come una istituzione dello Stato, ma i suoi membri presero presto a comportarsi in maniera così pervasiva da costringere il Parlamento a negare il diritto del Consiglio degli Anziani ad interferire con le attività degli organi statali, revocando lo status di “istituzione statale” al Mekhk – Khel (febbraio 1992).

per approfondire leggi “Libertà o Morte! Storia della Repubblica Cecena di Ichkeria”, acquistabile QUI)