Clooney Foundation for Justice stood up for a victim of domestic violence in Kyrgyzstan. The international human rights organization prepared an advisory opinion in support of Osh resident Gulzhan Pasanova, convicted by the court of first instance for the murder of her husband.
The organization’s observer was present at all hearings of the City court of Osh of the Kyrgyz Republic and reported on the trial that ended on March 5, 2020 with a conviction of 9 years in prison and a fine of $1200 (90 000 KGS).
The organization’s report states that the court against Pasanova was in violation of international human rights law that affected the outcome of her case and caused her significant harm.
The Foundation’s conclusion says that the court of first instance violated Gulzhan Pasanova’s right to equality of parties.
The forensic psychiatric examination, which was attached to the case file in relation to the accused, didn’t consider a question of whether prolonged domestic violence against Gulzhan Pasanova could affect her mental state during a quarrel with her husband, which led to his death.
Most of the psychiatrist’s findings, presented in just one and a half pages, focus on the defendant’s behavior during the examination. As for the evening when the incident happened, the report of the expert only repeats the statement of events from the words of the accused and presents the following conclusion “At the time of the offense, she could be aware of her actions and lead them.”
The act doesn’t explain on what basis this conclusion was made, and doesn’t consider the question of whether the domestic violence, to which Pasanova was subjected for a long time, could provoke a state of intense emotional disturbance (affect) during a quarrel with her husband, which entailed his death.
Despite this gap in the conclusion of a forensic psychiatric examination, which was extremely important for the petition for re-qualification of the charge, the court of first instance rejected the petition of the defense to conduct a complex forensic psychological and psychiatric examination. The court of first instance mistakenly considered that the conclusion of the forensic psychiatric examination, prepared during the investigation, was complete, and that there were no new circumstances requiring additional examination.
In addition, the principle of equality of parties at the court was violated because the court rejected the defense’s request to call witnesses who could testify about domestic violence that had taken place in the life of Gulzhan Pasanova.
Kyrgyzstan violated Pasanova’s right to presumption of innocence
“This was expressed in the fact that the entire period of the trial, Gulzhan Pasanova was put in a cell and was repeatedly subjected to verbal insults from the relatives of the deceased, who were present in the courtroom. These actions were conducive to creating an atmosphere in which Pasanova’s guilt was considered predetermined,” said the experts of George Clooney Foundation.
In addition, Kyrgyzstan didn’t ensure the right of Gulzhan Pasanova to equality before the law. This conclusion was reached by the Foundation’s consultants, believing that the trial of the accused was influenced by patriarchal prejudices and dangerous gender stereotypes that were previously noted by various UN agencies. As a result, Kyrgyzstan subjected Gulzhan Pasanova to discrimination and didn’t ensure her equality before the law.
This is evidenced by the fact that the court of first instance allowed the prosecutor to argue her position by the fact that the violence against Pasanova was justified by her alleged unfaithfulness, and that if her husband had actually beaten her, she would have divorced him. The prosecutor also interrupted the accused’s testimony with insults and tried to present her as a bad and ungrateful wife.
In addition, by refusing to consider whether the domestic violence to which Gulzhan Pasanova was subjected for a long time (whose victims are disproportionately more women than men) could affect her actions, the court of first instance thereby refused to seriously consider her statements of self-defense and state of intense emotional excitement (affect).
Gulzhan Pasanova, a 29-year-old mother of two young daughters, was married for seven years. She also raised two teenage children from her husband’s previous marriage.
On November 14, 2019, her husband allegedly saw that Pasanova came to work in a car with two men. He decided that Gulzhan was unfaithful to him, hit her in the face and took her phone.
In the evening of November 19, 2019, Pasanova’s husband returned home at about 22:00. He was drunk and accused Gulzhan of unfaithfulness. A quarrel ensued. The man threatened Pasanova, threw a kitchen knife at her, but missed. The situation was becoming increasingly tense, the husband hit Gulzhan in the head. When the woman ran away to the next balcony, she heard her husband shouting that he was going to kill her.
Fearing that he would beat her again, Pasanova took a piece of reinforcement, intended for home repairs, and returned to the living room. She hit her husband several times on the head with reinforcement, until he fell. At the trial, Gulzhan stated that she didn’t want to kill her husband; at the moment, she hit him, she was so scared and furious that she couldn’t control herself.
The woman tried to help her husband standing up, but he was unconscious. She ran to their neighbor (her husband’s brother) for help, and together they called the ambulance. The men’s death was certified several hours later at the City hospital of Osh.
Gulzhan Pasanova was arrested at her husband’s funeral and taken into custody until the trial. On December 23, 2019, after a month of investigation, she was charged under the article “Grievous bodily harm, negligently caused the death of the victim”.
The trial began on February 11, 2020. It consisted of three short hearings and a final debate of the parties and lasted a total of not more than six hours.
Leave feedback about this