Communicated on 6 February 2018

FIFTH SECTION

Application no. 6629/09 Abdulmanna GASIMOV against Azerbaijan lodged on 22 January 2009

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Abdulmanna Gasimov , is an Azerbaijani national, who was born in 1964 and lives in Baku. He is repres ented before the Court by Mr G. Zamanov , a lawyer practising in Azerbaijan.

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

On 26 October 2007 the applicant and four other persons were stopped at the street by police officers in plain clothes and taken to the Organised Crime Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Two of them were sentenced to 8 days of administrative arrest (it is not specified how it was done and by which authority) while another three, including the applicant, were given narcotic substance and told to admit that the narcotics belong to them or they would be charged with even more serious crimes. At the same time, they were promised to be released later if they made self-incriminating statements. According to the applicant, he had believed the police officers ’ promises and did as he was ordered to do.

On 27 October 2007 the police conducted a search at the applicant ’ s residence and found around 80 grams of opium in the basement of his house.

On 29 October 2007 the applicant ’ s remand in custody, calculating the period of detention from 27 October 2007 was authorised by the court of first instance.

On 6 February 2008 the Court of Serious Crimes convicted the applicant under Article 234.2 (preparation, possession, purchase and transportation of illegal drugs with intent to sell, or sale of illegal drugs) of the Criminal Code and sentenced him to five years ’ imprisonment. The applicant denied the accusation and argued that he had given self-incriminating statements regarding narcotics found on his body under pressure. The court relied, in particular, on the applicant ’ s pre-trial self-incriminating statements regarding narcotics found on his body and stated that they were given in presence of the applicant ’ s lawyer and neither the applicant nor his lawyer had lodged any complaint concerning any form of ill-treatment throughout pre-trial. Following a request of the defence, two additional witnesses who were attesting witnesses of search carried out at the applicant ’ s residence gave testimonies at the trial. They stated that they had not seen when and how the police officer found the narcotics in the basement of the applicant ’ s house. Having assessed their statements, the trial court further found that credibility of the evidence in question had not been undermined because according to the expert ’ s opinion, narcotics found at the applicant ’ s residence were of the same origin as the ones which were found on his body.

On an unknown date the applicant appealed against this judgment. He complained that the narcotics had been planted by the police both on him and at his residence and that his self-incriminating pre-trial statement had been extracted under pressure.

On 8 April 2008 the Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant ’ s appeal noting that the first-instance court ’ s judgment was lawful and substantiated. The appellate court essentially relied on findings and reasoning of the trial court.

On an unknown date the applicant lodged a cassation appeal reiterating his previous complaints.

On 12 August 2008 the Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal ’ s judgment.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains in substance under Article 6 of the Convention that the domestic courts did not call additional witnesses requested by him and did not assess statements of the attesting witnesses of search that they had not actually seen the exact moment when and how narcotics were discovered in his house.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against him, in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention? In particular:

(a) Was the applicant provided with legal assistance from the moment of his arrest? If so, was his lawyer present during the searches conducted on the applicant ’ s person and in his house? Were the searches carried out in accordance with domestic law?

(b) What had been the reason for the applicant ’ s arrest and on what suspicion had he been taken to the police station, apparently before any narcotic substances were found on him during the search subsequently conducted at the police station?

2. The parties are requested to produce copies of all relevant search records as well as all other formal records pertaining to any procedural steps taken during the period from 26 and 29 October 2007. The parties are further requested to provide copies of all the appeals, petitions and applications lodged by the applicant with each judicial instance throughout the entire criminal proceedings.