Svetlahorsk Investigation Committee reluctant to recognize the guilt of police officers in the death of Aliaksandr Akulich

Svetlahorsk resident Valiantsina Akulich received another ruling from the Svetlahorsk District Department of the Investigation Committee about the refusal to instigate a criminal case on the death of her son Aliaksandr Akulich in the detention center of the Svetlahorsk District Police Department in May 2013.

The woman appealed the previous decision with the help of lawyers of the HRC "Viasna". In July this year she filed an appeal about the disagreement with the refusal to instigate a criminal case to the district prosecutor's office and the district department of the Investigation Committee. On 1 August the head of the Svetlahorsk District Department of the Investigation Committee Aliaksandr Prykalotsin abolished the ruling about the denial in bringing the criminal case, dated 9 June 2013, and resumed the investigation check-up. Moreover, an additional forensic examination was appointed on Valiantsina Akulich's motion.

Aliaksandr Akulich's mother tried to appoint an additional examination for solving the question whether there was a directed relation between the death of her son and the non-timely rendering of medical aid by the officers of the Svetlahorsk District Police Department A. Bachko and R. Stseshankou, who kept duty in the detention center that day. However, again refusing to bring a case “due to the absence of corpus delicti in the actions of the police officers”, investigator Viachaslau Petachenka doesn't assess their actions. He issues his ruling on 10 August, without waiting for the results of the examination which was completed on 21 August.

Meanwhile, there are enough facts he could pay attention to. as it follows from the materials of the check-up, the questioned paramedic of the ambulance station explains that on 26 May 2012 she received a call from the police station at 1.05 a.m., and on arriving at the DPD at 1.10 a.m. she saw a man who was lying dead in the corridor of the detention center. The questioned duty policeman of the detention center Stseshankou explained, that he and his partner Bachko decided to lead Akulich
out of the cell “in order to bring him to the investigation office and call an ambulance in the case of neccessity, because his behavior was characteristic for an alcoholic psychosis”. They also decided to use physical force towards Akulich. According to Stseshankou, it took place at about 1 a.m., 5-10 minutes before the death of the detainee. However, ass it is indicated in the case materials, according to a record in the register of the use of physical force and police gear, they were used towards Mr. Akulich starting from 0.30 a.m. What hides behind such discrepancies in the time? Probably the fact, that Stseshankou and Bachko could beat a man in an inadequate state for half an hour instead of rendering him timely medical aid. It's quite interesting that his mother and the human rights defenders pointed at this circumstance in their appeal, but neither the investigator Petachenka, nor the DPD officers who gave explanations during the check-up, paid any attention to it.

In her statement about the disagreement with the denial in the instigation of a criminal case, Valiantsina Akulich asked to put concrete questions for additional examination:

1. Was the medical aid rendered to A. Akulich timely? If not, what were the consequences of the untimely medical aid to him?
2. Were there any opportunities to prevent the illness A. Akulich was diagnosed with, or its exacerbation?
3. What urgent medical aid did A. Akulich need since 10 p.m. on 25 May 2012?
4. Could such urgent medical aid be rendered to A. Akulich by an ambulance brigade or in a medical institution?
5. Was the death of A. Akulich inevitable if the medical aid was rendered timely?
6. Did A. Akulich have any contraindications to medical treatment?

It should be noted that in the presentation of its findings the commission of experts has demonstrated a great cynicism. They answered the first question in the following way: “No medical aid was rendered to A. Akulich as his biological death was registered on the arrival of the ambulance brigade”. What concerns all other questions, the answer was: “The forensic expert commission doesn't deal with any prognoses, but just assesses objective facts, that's why it is not possible to answer these questions”.

This case remains in the focus of attention of the Human Rights Center “Viasna”, who will continue helping Valiantsina Akulich in finding the truth in the situation with the death of her son.