Zhana Ptsishkina cannot get acquainted with resolution of Prosecutor General's Office regarding son's death

The mother of Ihar Ptsichkin, who died in prison in Valadarski Street in Minsk on August 4, 2013, has been seeking justice for a long time already, trying to establish the circumstances of the death of her son and bring to justice those guilty of the tragedy.

For a long time she wasn't allowed to study the materials of the inspection regarding the criminal case, though the preliminary investigation into the death of I. Ptsichkin hadbeen completed back in January 2015.

In early June, Zhana Ptsichkina learned from the response of the Office of the Prosecutor General to her complaint about the termination of the criminal investigation into her son's death, that the decision to terminate the criminal, dated December 29, 2014, was cancelled, and the case was sent back to the Investigative Committee of the Republic of Belarus for a new consideration. In addition, Zhana Ptsichkina passed to the Investigation Committee additional materials for studying and attaching them to the case. Among them there were the photos of Ihar Ptsichkin made during his receipt by the remand prison, and four days later, after his death.

The wish of Zhana Ptsichkina to familiarize with the contents of this decision of the Prosecutor General is quite understandable. However, at the end of June the head of the department of the General Prosecutor's Office I. Siauruk refused to issue her with a copy of the ruling, which revoked the earlier decision to terminate the preliminary investigation into her son's death. The reason for it was that “the decision taken also affects the interests of other parties to the proceedings".

Then Zhana Ptsichkina appealed to the Investigative Committee with the same request. However, as it turned out, this ruling was absent in the criminal case.

The lawyer of the Human Rights Center "Viasna" Pavel Sapelka noted the following in this regard:

"The Human Rights Center “Viasna” and I personally take a certain part in helping Zhana Ptsichkina, who set the Investigative Committee before the task to prosecute those responsible for the death of her son in the remand prison No. 1 in Minsk. Unfortunately, the investigation
initially went this way to completely close all materials relating to the preliminary investigation of the case. In particular, Zhana Ptsichkina was forced to give an undertaking about non-disclosure of information from the preliminary investigation. Now she cannot even tell what is going on during the investigation of the criminal case. That's why our consultations are largely confined to general issues: I explain her the procedural rights and the procedural duties of the Investigative Committee, which conducts the investigation. In particular, I proposed Ptsichkina, when she asked how to find out about the investigative actions that could be conducted, to study the ruling of the Office of the Prosecutor General that canceled the initial decision not to instigate the criminal case. However, having appealed to the Investigative Committee with the request to be familiarized with that ruling, where the flaws and mistakes of the investigation would be indicated, learned that there wasn't such ruling in this case at all. This is a big surprise: what can the Investigative Committee be investigating, and what guidelines it can follow. I regard it as a clear violation of the procedural rights of Zhana Ptsichkina as a victim in the criminal case.”

Zhana Ptsichkina, in her turn, intends to again appeal to the Prosecutor General's Office:

"They again instigated a criminal case against the medic who had failed to provide medical assistance to my son. They have finally proved that he wasn't a drug addict or alcoholic. However, I am still not allowed to read on what basis the case has been instigated. We will prepare a new complaint about it. Of course the case has been instigated against the medic, as to why he didn't render the proper medical aid, didn't invite anyone else. Why does he state that no resuscitation would help my son? If he wasn't addicted to drugs or aclohol, it could well help him. All this must be reflected in the ruling of the Office of the Prosecutor General, but they again force me to give an undertaking not to disclose the materials of the investigation. To my mind, this is done to hide the traces of the crime, traces of the murder. I am convinced of this. What secret can be made of it?

What concerns of the absence of the ruling of the General Prosecutor's Office in the materials of the case, I am not told anything. They didn't even want to pay attention to the bruises on his body: earlier they kept writing that there weren't bruises, but now the investigator has taken from me some photos, at one of which my son is pictured while hanging on the bar, and on the others – when his body is already in the morgue. The bruises are the same, that's why I believe that my son died in a hanging position. I don't know whether these photos will be attached to the case and will receive the due attention. Now I will again appeal the refusal to appeal to the General Prosecutor's Office the refusal to familarize me with the mysterious ruling and the inattention to the bruises. And, most importantly: why the investigators protract the investigation of the criminal case?"

Let us remind that Ihar Ptsichkin died in the remand prison on August 4, 2013 of cardiac arrest, the reasons for which are still unclear. His relatives believe that the death is the result of his being beaten by the prison guards, as there were many bruises and traits of beating on his body.