Kyrgyzstan: judge acquitted rapists of 13-year-old girl
The public of Kyrgyzstan and international human rights organizations were shocked by the unprecedented decision of the judge of the court in Ton district, Sabyr Soodonbekov, who acquitted two of three rapists of 13-year-old girl. UNICEF, UN Women and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) called the judge’s decision illegal in their joint statement.
It all started exactly one year ago. A seventh grade girl lived with her grandfather in the village while her parents looked after the cattle in the mountains. On November 28, the girl came home from school, went out and returned home only the next day. As the parents managed to find out from the girl, a 45-year-old fellow villager coaxed her to go with him to the capital, where he persuaded her to intimacy.
Later it became known that two more men – a school stoker and an unskilled worker at school – regularly raped the schoolgirl for six months.
When the truth was revealed, the relatives of the victim turned to law enforcement agencies. For a long time, investigators refused to accept the statement from them, but as a result, a criminal case was opened. However, no one expected such an outcome after a long trial. The court acquitted two of the defendants and re-qualified the article to a softer one for the third defendant.
“The judge released one of the defendants in the courtroom. Another was reduced the sentence by re-qualifying the charge from the article “Rape” to “Acts of a sexual nature with a person under the age of sixteen”. He received 7 years 6 months in prison. We consider the verdict illegal and unfounded,” said the girl’s lawyer Ainura Asanova.
On December 2, the court has already acquitted one of the suspects in organizing the rape. Thus, two of the defendants were acquitted. Only the 45-year-old rapist received a real term of imprisonment. Only one defendant received a term. However, despite the availability of evidence, the court applied a light article to him. Considering that he has served a third of his term in a pre-trial detention center, the man will be released in a couple of years.
After the story of the schoolgirl became public, Kyrgyz citizens were shocked by this incident. However, even more citizens were outraged by the judge’s actions. The public condemned the actions of Sabyr Soodonbekov. There was even a rally in the capital in support of a minor victim. Certain activists have come up with an initiative to punish the judge for his sentence. International organizations didn’t stand aside either. In the joint statement, UNICEF, UN Women and OHCHR stated that Kyrgyzstan must end impunity in cases of gender-based violence, especially violence against children.
“Considering the recent information about the acquittal of two men and the change of the article to a softer one for the third defendant in the rape case of 13-year-old schoolgirl, which lasted for six months, and that they filmed her and threatened to show the video to her classmates: UNICEF, UN Women and OHCHR condemn all forms of gender-based violence and call for full compliance with the law, due process of law and accountability for perpetrators of gender-based violence, in accordance with international human rights standards,” said in the statement.
International organizations called on the authorities of Kyrgyzstan to right a wrong and rehabilitate victims of gender-based violence.
“Prosecuting and sentencing any offender under the Criminal Code with sentences, which are comparable with the severity of the crime and in line with international human rights standards, would be a convincing signal that those, who abuse women and girls, will not go unpunished. On the 25th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration on the Protection of Women’s Rights, in accordance with the historical plan to promote the rights of women and girls, and two years after the tragic killing of 20-year-old Burulai, this case is a strong reminder of the need to respond decisively to violence against women and girls,” the appeal underlines.
The Ombudsman of Kyrgyzstan Tokon Mamytov is in solidarity with international organizations. He has already instructed the Authorized Representative of the Ombudsman Institute for Issyk-Kul region to carefully monitor the court hearings in the criminal case of the rape of a 13-year-old schoolgirl.
The girl’s parents said that they didn’t agree with the verdict of the court of Ton district, and they have already appealed to the Regional court of Issyk-Kul.
“The Commissioner of the Ombudsman for Issyk-Kul region will keep under control this criminal case and monitor the court hearings in the Regional court of Issyk-Kul. The girl is currently in the rehabilitation center in Issyk-Ata region. It should be noted that this case is under the control of the Ombudsman’s office,” the office said.
Regarding the re-qualification of the article for one of the rapists, according to the response of the Department of Internal Affairs of Ton district, it follows that this fact was originally registered on November 30, 2019 in the Unified Register of crimes and misdemeanors under Article 164 of the Criminal Code of Kyrgyzstan “Sexual acts with a person under 16 age”. Pre-trial proceedings were conducted under this article.
The Ombudsman’s office doesn’t agree with such a classification of the crime.
“It should have been initially registered in the Unified Register under Article 161 of the Criminal Code of the Kyrgyz Republic “Rape”. In this case, the guilty person would receive a more severe punishment,” the department believes.
ACCA asked Arsen Ambaryan, a lawyer for remedies against torture at the national and international level, to comment on the incident.
“It’s difficult to comment on cases that are known from the media. I tried to read the verdict, but alas, the verdict hasn’t been published. I went beyond this particular criminal case and drew attention to the low level of prosecutorial supervision over investigations, the credibility of the charges and the quality of evidence. Today, according to the Criminal Procedure Code, the prosecutor is not a kind of guarantor of procedural objectivity. Now, the prosecutor is a representative of the prosecution, which requires a serious and high-quality supervision of the investigation process and serious work during the trial from the prosecutor who supervises the investigation. Part 4 of Article 22 of the Criminal Procedure Code states: ‘No evidence has a predetermined force and is assessed by the judge in the aggregate.’ This requirement of the law requires the prosecutor to work in the court session, and not just read out the protocols of investigative actions. It is with obvious defects of the investigation that the evidence, examined in the court, is given more importance than the testimony obtained during the investigation. At this stage, the work of the prosecutor becomes significant. And what did the prosecutor say after this process? – ‘The verdict concerning the case of the rape of 13-year-old girl in Ton district has been appealed.’ At the same time, the Prosecutor’s office substantiated the appeal by discrepancies between the operative part of the announced verdict and its full version. I conclude that, in the opinion of the Prosecutor’s office, they didn’t see any problems with the court’s assessment of the examined evidence. I think the Prosecutor’s office needs to change the priorities of its work in the supervision of the investigation and work in court on each criminal case,” Ambaryan said.
According to the lawyer, if the Ombudsman’s office declares the wrong qualification of the crime, they probably have complete information on the case.
“The fundamental difference between these articles lies primarily in the so-called objective aspect of the crime. To qualify a crime as rape, an element such as the use of violence that is not dangerous to life and health, or the threat of its use against the victim or other persons, as well as the use of the victim’s helpless state, is necessary. In this case, the will (unwillingness) of the victim is not covered by the disposition of the article. The young age of the victim can be considered as a helpless state. Of course, other differences between these crimes can be cited,” the expert explained.
As for bringing the judge to justice for lenient and acquittal sentences to rapists, the maximum that can be done is to apply to the Disciplinary Commission under the Council of Judges of Kyrgyzstan.
“The prosecution has already used the procedural opportunity to appeal the verdict. We need to wait for the court’s decision on the complaint. I don’t exclude that the participants in the process will turn to the Disciplinary Commission under the Council of Judges of the Kyrgyz Republic. The legislation guarantees non-interference in the work of a judge. You cannot demand a report or an explanation of a particular case from a judge. A judge can be brought to disciplinary responsibility in case of obvious and gross violation of the law in administering justice,” concluded Arsen Ambaryan.
