Home

OLEG A. HALABUDENCO

ALL ABOUT THE INCIDENT IN TRANSNISTRIA OR THE FAILED RECRUITMENT

“An event, seen from one point of view, gives one impression.

Seen from another point of view, it gives much a different impression.

But it’s only when you get the whole picture, you can fully understand, what’s going on.”

GUARDIAN – POINTS OF VIEW (1986)

On April 2, 2016, in the territory of the unrecognized “Transnistrian Moldavian Republic” (TMR) located in the eastern part of the Republic of Moldova (Transnistria), the Transnistrian KGB (now MGB – Secret Service of the unrecognized state entity) committed a politically motivated provocation that fell beyond the conceivable limits on cynicism, meanness and lawlessness.

Transnistria, according to the current legislation of the Republic of Moldova and international law, “is part of the Republic of Moldova”. That fact is recognized by all participants in international legal communication, including the Russian Federation. Responsibility for the observance of human rights in the territory of Transnistria is imposed by the international community on the Republic of Moldova and the Russian Federation as a state that exercises effective control over unrecognized state entity. 

”The law” of an unrecognized state is recognized as a fact that implies, like any legal fact, certain legal consequences,  which are assessed in the context of legal constructions of recognized jurisdiction, in our case including the jurisdictions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

The references to the “legislation”, the de facto institutions of Transnistria and the persons participating in their activities, which I give below, do not mean to recognize the presumption of the legitimacy of their status and not implies the legitimization of them.

We will try, without anger and bias, to understand the essence of what has happened and the consequences arising from the circumstances of the case. Everything I have stated in this document has documentary evidence, and  findings rely on a standard of proof, leaving other conclusions beyond the reasonable doubt.

When investigating the circumstances and clarifying the essence of what has happened in Transnistria, it should be borne in mind that the methods used by intelligence services, regardless of their status, fundamentally differ from methods used by institutions that position themselves as the transparent law enforcement organizations. It is a common practice of intelligence services to cover active measures in order to affect public opinion and some individuals behavior by silent so-called operational-search measures and public pseudo-processes.

Nevertheless, noting the fundamental difference between secret organizations in terms of the legality of their status, I will make a general reservation: the activity of armed organizations operating in the eastern regions of the Republic of Moldova are illegal. In accordance with article 282 §1 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Moldova, the organization of a paramilitary force not provided by the Republic of Moldova legislation or its leadership, as well as participation in such group, is punishable by imprisonment for a term of 2 to 7 years. I leave outside the subject matter of the present report the selective application of provisions of mentioned article of Criminal law by Moldavian enforcement authorities against the actors of criminal acts. Presumably the current state of affairs is dictated by the unwillingness of the state official authorities to stimulate the escalation in the conflict zone of the Dniester left bank.

So, being a scholar-lawyer, I has really cooperated with the law faculty of the Taras Shevchenko Transnistrian State University (TSU) for a number of years. I arrived there only at the invitation of its administration three times a year, with an interval up to 9 months. The total volume of the teaching load was purely symbolic. It was 0.1 of salary at the correspondence department (80 hours of annual load, with  tests and exams, which was included directly in the hours allocated for lectures and seminars). First of all, I considered my academic activity as a form of humanitarian cooperation. The relationship was purely formal, and I did not enter into any “confidential” relations with anyone, and after lecturing, on the same day I was returning home to Chisinau. Outside the educational activities, I had no connections with the region, except for the memories of my grandmother – nee Buczacka, who lived there once. She being the daughter of the landowner Stepan Buchatsky (my great-grandfather), owner of land near the village of Doibany (Powiat bałcki, Government of Podolia, now the territory of Transnistria), loved to talk about what good people surrounded her as a child.

I have never had any conflicts with professors, nor, for sure, with students at the faculty. By the way, the students there were in the mass not the worst. Of course, the majority of part-time students, and indeed full-time ones collaborated with security forces of the unrecognized republic. In fact, the few students who passed my current forms of control were conscientious, but most of them managed  without my participation and preferred, having waited for me to leave, to “solve the problem” with other apparently less demanding professors (it is enough to see the remaining examination lists for the respective disciplines). I admit, however, some irregularities have also happened. So, for example, the combatant of a limited group of the Russian Federation troops or of the Peace Forces used to came to the exam, tired after a guard duty. I saw that the Roman wisdom was the last thing on his mind. What could he do in such a situation? He was muttering something asking for compassion. Of course, in this case I considered the demonstration of rigid  principles to be inadequate. In a word, it was a routine form of existence of an unrecognized university in an unrecognized state (now the diplomas of the TSU are recognized by the official authorities of the Republic of Moldova).

Against such a backdrop, the actions of Transnistrian KGB against me could have seemed prima facie unexpected. Their beginning, as it follows from the circumstances occurred in the future, can be attributed to the invitation of one of the faculty officials, happened on June 20, 2015, to cooperate for the next 2015-2016 academic year. I note that, first, by that time I had no plans in principle to come more to Tiraspol: I went there at my expense, by public transport, undergoing unpleasant and humiliating procedures of so-called “registration” when crossing the administrative border. Secondly, the region was increasingly embraced by the fervent ideology of the hybrid world and the hybrid war, exacerbating the already present notes of the surrealism of social consciousness and individual forms of behavior generated by prolonged self-isolation. But, since I was invited, I had not refused, especially since it was suggested that I would  teach the disciplines of my profile (KGB developers of the criminal operation against me decided to play in the future on this weakness for my professional activity). At that moment I was alarmed by the attempt of one of the officials faculty of Law, TSU to involve me in communication on political subjects and close to its. The communication was more like an easy provocation. Of course, for myself, I noted this fact.

It is obvious that the logical consequence can not precede the argument. Therefore, before continuing presentation of the factual circumstances, I will try to determine what motivations had guided the developers of the active operation against me, what key goal they had pursued and what tasks they had solved, based on the circumstances of what happened. So, the main “idea” was to impute me the responsability for adherence  to “Ukrainian nationalism”. Reason for this was the mention of my name in the appeal concerning the Crimean events of the spring of 2014, signed by the group of scientists from different countries who was not indifferent to the destine of the Slavic world and the global legal order. The appeal began with the words: “Dear Russian scientific community! Colleagues! Friends!” Against the background of further events, such a harmless and non-resonant statement (it contains the names of scientists, but not politicians) could hardly be taken seriously as a reason for carrying out a costly active operation against me personally, as will be shown below with significant risks for all parties to the conflict. Its developers knew the risks they were taking.

Of course, discussions on political topics are not the subject of the present report. In any case, I note that for me, as a scientist, political matter, in relevant cases, is the subject of research, but not the purpose of the action. Nevertheless, the absurdity and criminality of the “accusation” of political bias against me is obvious. Following the Transnistrian KGB logic, the members of the UN General Assembly which adopted the relevant resolution should be recognized as “Ukrainian nationalists” for this reason. Of course, positions on this issue can be different, and discussions are and will be under way (I hope to God that the conflict will be resolved peacefully, taking into account, first of all, the interests of citizens and the principles of international law). But accusation against me and further persecution on the indicated far-fetched political motive unequivocally testifies that all that has happened is nothing else but a political spying of illegal organizations against a citizen in his own national territory. Otherwise, can any official of Transnistria explain what does the intelligent services of the region and official media serving them have to do with the subject, which served as a formal reason for persecuting me in the region?

Of course, some may wonder why I call political motives far-fetched. The answer to this question is simple: anyone who knows me can confirm that ethnophyletism is alien to me in any form. As for me as the Slav, Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus are equally close to my heart. I am closely connected with their academic and cultural environment, but what a trouble!  I am also permanently living in Chisinau, that is, in the area of ​​the Eastern Romance ethno cultural space, and I have no reason not to love my homeland (may those who disagree with this thought forgive me) . Did the developers of the active operation understand that? I think, more than clearly.  In fact, they benefited of that. In this case, I will reveal the true goals of the active operation: there is a creation of “legend” in order to manipulate in the further the “victim” in interests that go beyond the forms of civilized communication of peoples. I was the victim more than comfortable: really, what the scientist whose native language is Russian (never mind that many other languages ​​of peoples of Europe are close to me and they would not understand it), residing in Moldova, can oppose to the pressing of organized groups of illegal power organizations?  On the other hand, my scientific reputation outside the Republic of Moldova and, perhaps, my personal qualities together with the artificially created compromising “evidences” used for blackmail should have been the basis for active manipulation me in the future.

Thus, and this is obvious, the persecution of me in Transnistria for the mentioned far-fetched political reasons testifies the gross violation of Article 10 §1 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, according to which everyone has the right to freedom of expression, and this can be reasonably regarded as unlawful persecution of dissenters. The actions of Transnistrian authorities persecuting me, causing me irreparable moral and material damage, should be considered as a flagrant interference in private life and restriction on freedom of opinion. In this connection, the European Court notes that this right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. The right guaranteed by Article 10 of the Convention applies to all types and ways of expressing opinions.

The second version developed by intelligence service officers of the region beyond the control of moldavian constitutional authorities was that I had been engaged in “espionage”. Obviously,  involving in their illegal activities an “unmasked spy” as I was considered by them, the pygmies of the mind, contradicts the canons of intelligence activity: a double agent is known to be more dangerous than an open enemy. Hence the painful idea clearly traced in their further actions, consisting in a maniacal desire to “expose” me. ”Here is a spy and what can you say?”- a familiar label, is not it? In fact, these people can not imagine that a scientist would promote the interests of science at his own expense, and where? in the post-Soviet space, which is extremely unfavorable for all forms of social interaction. Extremely perverted logic can be traced in this: a person, in their opinion, can not work for free, “there is something behind this …” After all, in their opinion, interested motives of activity and hedonistic pleasures set in motion a social organism, and, therefore, behavioral acts associated with them are convenient objects for manipulation. I note that such an understanding led to a fundamental error of those, who having reached formal power in the post-Soviet space never matured. They did not come out of the worldview of a Dostoevsky’s teenager, who, as you know, had dreamed of becoming a Rothschild: they succed to grab a multi-billion dollar fortune, but so what?

This people  with a primitive consciousness who were developing an active operation against me failed to understand that, being in the opinion of leading Russian scientists “a talented scientist, decent person and competent specialist,” I am “one of the few foreign civilians who maintains close ties with Russian academic centers, and thus participate in the formation of a common Russian-language legal tradition,” obeying the interests of the development of the scientific space, united by a community of purely professional interests, I done and am doing it disinterestedly. But no! 

As an author of hundreds scientific papers (most of them in Russian), participant in many international conferences held by the leading educational and scientific institutions of the Russian Federation, being bound by partnership and comradely relations with the legal scientific community of Russia, editorial board member of Russian well-known  scientific juridical journals, author of the thesis reports of my colleagues  Russian scientists, I did all this only with one goal, in the view of the secret organization: to be introduced with “hostile intentions” …. in the scientific community.  That’s how it is! One more thing is of interest: the illegal secret organization operating in Transnistria knew for a fact that I could not be reproached for any “hostile” actions on the territory controlled by an unrecognized state. Consequently, this is unreasonable and obviously absurd suspicions of activity outside the territory controlled by the unrecognized state,   and this raises even more questions.

In this connection, I declare with all responsibility that I have never and nowhere been engaged in activity incompatible with tasks of science and education. I did not have and do not have any compensatory or gratuitous obligations to any secret organization, including the national security service of the Republic of Moldova. However, I do not consider shameful if anyone within the limits of his professional competence, ethical norms and convictions assists law enforcement authorities, especially when it comes to issues of national security, territorial integrity, country’s economic well-being, public order, protection of rights, freedoms and dignity of other persons.

Alexander Gornostal (Горносталь Александр Петрович), at that time the major, head of the Transnistrian KGB division on general issues and, respectively, “the expert on general issues”, was the one who carried out immediate organization and leadership of the active measures.

The task set up by the Transnistrian KGB found enthusiastic support from members of the TSU Faculty of Law, who created on this occasion a secret headquarters to assist in the special operation against me. Taking the opportunity, I note that I know their names, since the intel officers have divulged them, and it is understandable why. But in this case the human court is most likely powerless. Let their God judge them. In any case, it is obvious that the provocation would not have been successful without active assistance of a group of conspirators from the TSU. The formation of motives for each group of people who took part in this shameful active operation clearly indicates that it was well planned and did not have a spontaneous nature.

What motives guided conspirators from TSU? Firstly, to distract attention from the real problems at the Faculty of Law of the TSU accusing of “corruption” the university lecturer who comes every six months, and from where?  – from the hated Chișinău. I note that, having thrown the masks of hypocrisy off, being  predominantly citizens of Moldova, they like very much to come to Chișinău and satisfy their interests, receive medical and educational services. Few people know that the children of high-ranking officials of the Transnistrian intelligence services successfully, without any discrimination, study in the universities of Chisinau at the expense of the budget of the Republic of Moldova. So, the conspirators from the TSU found the choice of the sacred victim for the specified motive obviously to their taste. Let me remind you, however, in this connection, that the place of sheep and goats has long been determined: “… and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left.” (Matthew 25:32–33)

Another motive, which was also fully approved by the conspirators from the TSU and the leaders of the active operation, was the desire to demonstrate, through the commission of a crime against me, its importance, to demonstrate to all interested persons how much their actions effectively influenced, and their decisions were taken into account in the post-Soviet space, including the Republic of Moldova. But there it is! Obviously, this idea fix stems from a sense of chronic inferiority characteristic of many people in Transnistria, whose de facto administration has been unsuccessfully “selling” the status of an unrecognized state to all interested parties for the past ten years. Needless to say, the chosen method of making yourself more important is more than a dubious and extremely immoral way of legitimizing.

Finally, banal xenophobia was the third motive for conspirators from the TSU, who volunteered to actively assist the illegal secret service of Transnistria. In their imagination they are a kind of mythical core of the notorious “Russian world”, and therefore only they have the “right” to “true” point of view, in their opinion. Okay, I am talking about people who, in their ethno cultural origin, really have nothing to do with what they zealously support. The desire of some individuals in the “Transnistrian Moldavian Republic” to appear before the world “more Catholic than the Pope himself” is ineradicable and, under normal circumstances, can cause only a smile. However, becoming a motive for criminal action, the behavior of parabalani of this century should not be left without attention.

The intentions of the persons who formed the core of the conspiracy in the TSU were multiplied many times due to feelings of inferiority, narrow-minded hostility and irrational envy: “Well, he writes scientific papers, avoiding cheap speculation, his works are read, often quoted, but are we worse? Let’s show him and the whole world what we are capable of. Moreover, in support of the version formed by the intelligence service of the unrecognized region, we will intensify the hostile connotation with obvious lies: He allowed statements against Russia in confidential conversations with professors and students”. Everything is disgusting in these and similar provocative affirmations, including references to some kind of “confidential conversations”, which, certainly, I did not have with anyone and had no intention to communicate with anybody from TSU, as well as a desire to present me as an enemy to my Russian fellow scholars. My judgments as a scientist are always justified and have never stepped out line of ethical norms on which the good neighborliness of nations is based. Obviously, the official statement against me made in Transnistria is clearly on a discordant note with the actual state of affairs. It is impossible in this connection not to draw attention once again to the fact that all this nonsense deprived of any factual confirmation is attributed to a foreign citizen, it is clear, with the purpose of forming a legend, but still: being literally perceived, such false statements testify the symptoms of political spying against me carried out by the forces of the illegally operating secret organization.

I foresee possible doubts, which can be expressed by interested persons in relation to the declared in the present. Well, what I have said can be refuted by revealing the real materials of the secret-service dossier. Such a one is initiated on everyone who comes under the attention of the special services, much earlier than the very operative action begins. In this regard, I recall the crooked smile of mentioned Gornostal, when, to my question whether I had been in the KGB operative investigation  for a long time, he responded smugly: “For a very long time!” The Transnistrian KGB (MGB) is a unified centralized system of State security. Proceeding from official acts, the competence of this illegal secret intelligence service consists, within its powers, in providing security, carrying out intelligence and counterintelligence activities, ensuring economic security and strengthening the statehood of the ”Transnistrian Moldavian Republic”.  The answer to the rhetorical question, what the competence of this secret organization has to do with activity of a scientist and University Lecturer, I think, is obvious. 

So, the purpose of the operative procedure against me was established: this was a provocation for the commission of a crime in order to actively manipulate me later, after achieving my destruction. The tasks for the persons involved in this shameful act was set up. The direct executor for immediate implementation of the provocation was instantly found. It was a certain Alexander Tazetdinov (Тазетдинов Александр Эдуардович). He was a kind of very sketchy infernal person, on a short leash of the unrecognized region intelligence services, and he was suppose to portray the role of student provocateur.

(source: source)

According to the documents available in the TSU (most of them are mutually contradictory), he was expelled from university  in 2013 because of educational failure. Later in September 1, 2014, supposedly he was reinstated to the fourth year of the Faculty of Law of the correspondence department on a contractual basis, with the condition of surrendering the academic difference until December 2014. Based on a literal interpretation of the order, it follows that if the student does not take academic debts, the educational relationship with him will be terminated. While not touching on the issue of the legality of administrative act of individual character, it should be noted that for the first time Tazetdinov requested me by telephone to take his academic debts  in the fall of 2015, that is much later than deadline for  passing academic debts. The certified extract from the order did not contain any mention of extending of period for taking the academic debts for him (there was one note about this only in the examination-and-test list). Consequently, at the time of the provocation he himself was not sure of his status as a “student”. I directly asked him in what relations he had been with the university, and he replied: “everything is very difficult.” Nevertheless, in violation of the established procedure, the faculty administration actually allowed Tazetdinov to attend classes. He was present at them, thereby creating a false appearance of his education at the Faculty of Law at TSU. In accordance with paragraph 36 of the “Regulations on the course examinations and tests and the order of registration of re-training in the TSU”, by the order of the rector on the proposal of the dean of the faculty, the students “who did not liquidate the academic debt on time” ought to be expelled. I think it’s pretty obvious why it was not done.

It should be noted that this person had formed motives to take an active part in the provocation. The motives can be described by means of a metaphor suggested by the classic: Polygraph Polygraphovich, as you know, didn’t like Professor Preobrazhensky very much, and we know for what. In this regard, we can congratulate the Transnistrian intelligent services and those who helped actively them with the serious scientific achievement: they managed to “resurrect” the unfortunate test subject, returning him back to the state of a semi-full-fledged creature, which, according to the laws of the genre, now should be nominated as the future leader of their society.

However, let us leave the sad rhetoric and return to the events line, especially since the readers unsophisticated  in the intricacies of the intelligence services work are precisely expecting it. So, my next visit to the TSU was to take place in December of the same 2015 year, that was, almost six months later (although, in September of the same year I came over the TSU to sign certain documents). However, I was surprised by the phone call of the “student” unexpected in the normal state of affairs, who insistently had asked me to come to Tiraspol and accept making up academic debts on the disciplines. Actually, from the first call it became clear to me that a provocation was being prepared for me: I have not remembered for a long time the case when someone from the student had called and invited me to come for taking academic debts to the TSU, which is far enough – 155 kilometers of a joyless round-trip. As I have already mentioned, students-debtors have always managed without me. Someone had to give him my phone number. He refused to come to Chisinau for taking his debts. I asked him to call back later. Exactly right after a specified period of time (a week) he insistently called me again; such kind of student-debtors behavior is strange in itself. In communicating on the phone, he literally begged me to come to the TSU and accept his academic debt.By that time, I had the opportunity to be in Tiraspol and I succumbed to the persuasion of the technical executor of the provocation to come and accept the “debt”, but on condition that, firstly, he would be ready, and secondly, he would cover the trip costs. In response, after talking with the immediate provocation organizers, covering the microphone with his hand he agreed to my terms. Probably, from this moment it would be logical for me to stop all sorts of trips to the territory outside the moldavian official authorities control, but some circumstances, which I perhaps will mention later, as well as some simple-minded curiosity pushed me to search for the reasons for the clearly marked interest to me from the Transnistrian intelligence service. If I refused to travel, everything would have gone differently, but do not think that for the better: the goal set by the special services in any case should have been realized. If I crossed the region for the purpose of traveling beyond the borders of Moldova or working with other educational institutions functioning there, their ”unhealthy interest” in me would have been manifested inevitably. Then tell me about the infringements on ones freedom of movement on the national territory – an obligation accepted by both the Moldavian and Transnistrian parties. And thus it was possible to prove empirically:  the entry in Transnistria and even more  the most innocuous socially useful activity like to deliver lectures  in a university  involve risks to my life. 

I foresee reproaches to me that only I  had myself to blame for what had happened, and there was also a provocation in my actions. I answer: first, unlike the provocateurs, my actions were passive throughout the described period of time. I did not collect information about other people, did not enforced anybody for meetings and did not play ”retaking of tests”,  did not extort, did not condition my actions by any offers. And on the contrary, the behavior of the provocateurs in the specified period and in the future was active and was carried out, obviously, with the aforementioned goal. Secondly, I proceeded from the intrinsic imperative, if you like, of not causing  evil to anyone. The harmfulness was excluded in my actions due to my internal beliefs: I should do so in the interests of the educational process, I am to do so since I have assumed the obligation.

At a meeting in late November or early December 2015 (I do not remember exactly), Tazetdinov did not show any knowledge. I gave him some advice on what the student should know in order to get a qualification, and we parted. I do not remember the details of the meeting now because of remoteness of events, but it was clear he was closely watching me, he knew me in person, and his intentions were not good.

The next meeting with the provocateur took place on March 1, 2016. This time it was held within the operational experiment organized by the Transnistrian KGB and was meant for provocation. As you see, there is no need to talk about reasonable arguments for carrying it out in terms of legality. Then I worked at my own expense for a whole academic hour in detail advising Tazetdinov. During our communication he was strongly provoking me to extortion, that saying: “it would be better for you to give me grades in the easy way.” In a word, I has upset Gornostal and his company with my stubbornness (leaving the classroom I noticed how all time he had  hidden shyly behind the door when trying to provoke). In fact, they needed “evidence” to compromise me, and I stubbornly demanded only knowledge from the provocateur. Later, the videorecording of that amiable conversation was withdrawn from the “case” material, and it is understandable why: in its decisions, the ECHR repeatedly stressed that after the first failed “operational experiment” the following ones after it, as a rule, are not caused by operational necessity and do not correspond to the spirit of the law. In other words, the actions of the agent purposefully pursuing the victim unequivocally testify their provocative nature.

I note that in the materials of the so-called “case” the copy of examinatin-and-test list No.106 for the difference in the curricula of Tazetdinov Alexander Eduardovich certified by the Transnistrian KGB officer (at that time the curator of the TSU) Roman Mokryak (Мокряк Роман Иванович) contains clearly visible even in the picture the correction of the date in two places: the initial date of 01.03.16 is changed in 02.04.2016. Just compare, for example, the correction with the figure “4”, affixed with the same hand and by the same person in the inspection-and-seizure report of 02.04.2016 or in the “Resolution on the application of technical means” from 02.04.2016. Obviously, this fact calls into question,  with all the consequences  that entails, the probative value of the data obtained during the so-called “operative investigation activity” and testify the premeditated character of the provocative actions against me organized by the Transnistrian KGB agents.

On the last “retaking”, on April 2, 2016, on Saturday, held at Tazetdinov’s personal request, after classes, during non-working hours, I initially flatly refused to mark with a grade, since the provoker still did not show any confident knowledge. It is clear that he did not need it. Tazetdinov was tasked with a clear mission to impose me money by any means. Was it worth to waste my time and energy on the person undeserving attention? I note that earlier there was no agreement between us about the specified date and all the more time for retaking the debt.  In response to my refusal, Tazetdinov started begging me to mark him with grades, saying: “Please, give me grades, this is my last chance”, referring also to the fact that “earlier he had passed the Roman law in the test form”, and it is about only transferring a grade for the given previously test in the examination list. On this day I felt tired, my mind was on the some scientific issues and the planned medical operation. In a word, my plans did not include communication with agents of the illegal intelligence service of the region.

Of course, in this connection, I can say with full confidence that there was no interested motive,  which is the necessary element of any corruption-related crime. My inner will to give him grades, albeit deformed under the influence of provocateur behavior, was formed before the opening of the examination record list. I can also affirm that I had reasons to reimburse the expenses incurred by me for the “entertainment” of the Transnistrian KGB officers, the only and obvious purpose of which was to create the appearance of a criminal action committed by me. In fact, who can seriously reproach me that, being obedient to the teacher’s duty, I have spent my time and energy thrice coming to unplanned and unpaid classes, being aware that a plot was being prepared behind my back, and in so doing have dared to encroach on compensation for the expenses incurred? According to the opponents logic, I have nothing more to do, except to drive around and amuse at my own expense the “honorable” public. However, it is clear that in this situation, in fact, neither they nor me was interested in money. It is important to note one thing: at that moment when I had  opened the examination file and found the banknote  (it was placed in such a way that in any case as soon as I opened the notorious examination-and-test list, I would have to touch it with my hand), I clearly realized: if I thwart  their plan, I will not return home. One can imagine what would follow. Well, almost a year they chased me as “a special dangerous state criminal”, but everything broke down. Where could I go in this case? To the prosecutor’s office of Transnistria? (The thought did cross my mind, however, but it could cause only laughter from any clear-headed person). Cases of “planting” the drugs and weapons by “law enforcement” authorities represent a common practice in Transnistria. Now some cases on such “accusations” in Transnistria are under consideration by the Grand Chamber of the ECHR. It is possible that something more “exotic” would be invented for the occasion, and, in fact, certain people would have believed. The subsequent events only confirmed my fears.

Several dozen armed men –  Transnistrian KGB officers and, later on, collaborators of “Transnistrian Investigative Committee” involved to the made-to-order “case” and accompanied by pressmen, in strict accordance with the goal and tasks, simulated the “legality” of detention starting at about 12 o’clock on April 2, 2016. In fact, since the indicated time, there has been an absolutely illegal act: the kidnapping of a person. I recall that the decision of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights on the complaint “Moser v. Moldova and Russia” states that the Transnistrian de facto authorities do not have a legal right to arrest and detention, “as they are part of the system, not allowing people to enjoy their rights.”

First of all, the Transnistrian KGB officers were interested, of course, not in the circumstances of the staged “case”, but in the fact that fully belongs to their competence, namely: my contacts with the intelligence communities of other states and connections within moldavian political circles, as well as abroad. In doing so, I was subjected to direct psychological pressure from the Transnistrian KGB operative officers, who demanded from me to make confessions (to plead) guilty. Later, at 16.55 on the same day, after “communicating” on “social and political” topics with the officers of the illegal secret organization, my “detention” was processed by the investigator of the “Transnistrian Investigative Committee”. His name is Alexander Bratanciuc (Братанчук Александр Павлович). Being involved in this shameful game, he actively participated in fabricating of the “case” against me, although he tried to give his actions the appearance of legality and some decency.

Thus, as a result of deliberately illegal actions of the Transnistrian KGB, I was imprisoned by armed forces illegally operating on the territory of the Republic of Moldova. Actually, I was ”detained” from 12.00 p.m. on April 2, 2016 to 16.25 on April 5, 2016 (76 hours 25 minutes). I note that, according to Art. 6 of the “Criminal Procedure Code of TMR”, no one can be detained on suspicion of committing a crime or taken into custody in the absence of legal grounds provided for by this Code. Until a court decision, a person can not be detained for more than 72 (seventy-two) hours. Thus, the very fact indicates a gross violation of the right to freedom and personal inviolability by the Transnistrian security forces, even according to their “legislation” in force.

The fact of illegality of intelligence service’s actions in terms of the rule of law,  that functions de iure (Republic of Moldova), is obvious. The сriminal punishment harm (the generic object) on the made-to-order “case”, initiated in order to mask an active measure, is defined as “a crime against state, interests of the state and municipal service.” However, what “state power”, what “public service” interests they are talking about, speaking in terms of the internationally recognized jurisdiction (the Republic of Moldova)? However, it is necessary to explain the illegality of the actions of the security organizations officers in terms of the Transnistrian “legislation” (I recall that the actions of de facto power organizations of the unrecognized state constitute the matter of the fact, not the right).

Thus, according to the case file, the Transnistrian KGB officers proceeded to organize the operation, namely the “operative experiment”, right after the first Tazetdinov’s notification, in the absence of attempts to verify this information or consider other means of investigating of the supposed “criminal” activity. The information that I have allegedly been engaged in activity that could be classified as illegal was based on a single source – the informant Tazetdinov who agreed to cooperate with the Transnistrian KGB. But it is not clear why Tazetdinov, on his way, supposedly,  to examinations, decided at 8 am, on Saturday, April 2, 2016, to apply for cooperation with the Transnistrian KGB. Any sane person will smile at the omnipotence of Tazetdinov, who managed, in an hour and a half (at 9.40  he was in the hall of the TSU, faculty of law) on Saturday, at 8 am, to write an application, to convince and organize the Transnistrian KGB staff including the chairman of the organization in the necessity and expediency of carrying out an “active operation” against me, to receive instruction (Bratanciuc confessed to me that he personally had prepared a provocateur on the eve of the special operation), and proceed to its realization.

It should be noted that Tazetdinov like any other student had the opportunity provided by the “Regulation on course exams and tests and the order of registration of re-training in the T.G. Shevchenko TSU”, in my absence by decision of the head of the department, to appeal to another professor believing that I “unfairly had  created obstacles while holding examinations”. Tazetdinov, however, did not officially apply to the faculty administration to replace the teacher and continued to pursue me with persistent requests  to hold examinations. Thus, his role in the so-called “operational experiment” was active, and his actions were clearly provocative. It should be mentioned that the case file do not contain any facts of extortion on my part; they never existed and could not exist, at least, because of my convictions (in the following nine months of the so-called “investigation” there was not a single fact that would show the illegality of my actions). Even more, in my characteristic, issued at the Faculty of Law of the TSU and available in the papers of the so-called “case”, it is stated that “there were no complaints against me from the students”.

However, it is noteworthy that my actions was qualified exactly under Article 286 §2 of the “Criminal Code of TMR” in the “certificate-memorandum” compiled by the Transnistrian KGB on April 2, 2016, whereas the “charge” was brought against me on April 5, 2016, under Art. 286 §1 of the “Criminal Code of TMR”. This stipulation in the “certificate-memorandum” is not accidental; the qualification, which is obviously made retroactively, is crucial for giving  the appearance of “legality” to the KGB officers actions. The fact is that, according to clause 4 of Article 8 of the ”Law on Operative-Investigative Activity in the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic”, the organization of an operative experiment and operative infiltration are allowed only for the purpose of identifying, preventing, detecting and disclosing a grave crime or particularly grave crime, and also in order to identify persons who prepared, are committing or have committed it. Thus, the initial qualification of the alleged “crime” excluded the operational experiment as being illegal (according to Article 14 §2 of the “Criminal Code of Transnistria”, it is referred to “non-grave crimes” and, respectively, provides for a sanction of up to 3 years). Consequently, the factual data obtained by means of it must be recognized as faulty (unacceptable), as received in violation of the law. Article 23 of the “Constitution of TMR” directly and unequivocally says that evidence obtained in violation of the law has no legal force.

Thus, this correction in the certificate-memorandum was made in order to giving the appearance of “legality” to the operation and it is one of many examples of tampering with evidence by the Transnistrian KGB in my “case”. The legality of my actions on April 2, 2016 could not be questioned in principle, as evidenced by the materials of the so-called “interrogation” on that date and the “charges” filed on April 5, 2016. It should be borne in mind that officially, even in Transnistria, the criminally-legal qualification of “crimes” is carried out by authorized institutions and officials: investigators, prosecutors and judges. The collaborators of the state security services, according to the ”Law on the State Security Service of the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic”, do not have such  a competence. 

Therefore, it is clear, in terms of the de facto “legislation” in Transnistria, that my actions does not contain any elements of crimes attributed to me, and the actions of the Transnistrian KGB  on the organization of the operational experiment have gone beyond the limits of the their “law”, but my behavior was the result of actions that should be regarded as incitement  by the KGB officers to commit a crime.

The practice developed by the European Court of Human Rights allows, in the form of a test, to distinguish between a provocation into committing a crime (entrapment) and a crime. First, provocation is always committed with the participation of the authorities (in our case de facto authorities of the unrecognized region). Secondly, the provocation is carried out by the active actions of the agent provocateur (that is quite clear). Thirdly, the provocation is based on unconfirmed assumptions that there is an intent for committing of a crime (which is obvious). Fourthly, secret agents do not join the committing crime, but incite to commit a crime (also no doubt). Fifthly, a provocation to a crime is characterized by the pressure of agents-provocateurs on the victim in order to commit a crime (it is true). Sixthly, the provocation is supposed to be committed in the absence of independent judicial or prosecutorial control over the activities of secret agents (it is not even worth discussing). The application of this test criteria to the circumstances of the so-called “criminal case” initiated against me on all points gives, as it is clear from  the materials of the “case”, a positive result, which makes it possible to state unequivocally: the actions of the Transnistrian KGB constitute a provocation to commit a crime.  In this regard, the ECHR practice stated that the trial will be considered fair in terms of Article 6 §1 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, when all evidence obtained as a result of the Transnistrian KGB provocation are excluded. After their removing from the so-called “case”, as you can understand, we would see only the Cheshire Cat’s smile.

Therefore, it follows that the actions of the de facto Transnistrian authorities on my “detention”, but in fact the abduction, had no legal basis and thus grossly violated the provisions of Article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms , according to which everyone has the right to freedom and personal inviolability. In this connection, the European Court reiterates that Article 5 of the Convention guarantees the fundamental right to liberty and security of person. The European Court points out that the expressions “lawful” and “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law” in the Article 5 §1 of the Convention essentially refer back to the national law and states the obligation to conform to the substantive and procedural rules thereof.

The Convention also requires any deprivation of liberty to correspond the aims of Article 5 of the Convention, which consist in preventing person’s  arbitrary deprivation of their liberty. The provision of the Article 5 § 1  of the Convention requires, first of all, any detention or imprisonment be occurred in accordance with a procedure established by law. The lack of legal grounds for imprisonment is incompatible with the principle of protection against arbitrariness guaranteed by this provision of the Convention.

There were two conditions for my liberation from the abduction: posting  a bail and “my admition of guilt.” A special mission for meeting each of this condition was assigned to the person who played the role of “advocate”. He was introduced to me as a comrade of the “investigator”, with whom “it would be easier to solve problems” (it is an “usual” practice in Transnistria). Perfectly realizing the real state of affairs, I did not complicate the situation and agreed to his “help.” His name is Pavel Chiico (Кийко Павел Александрович). He was hardly conscious  what story he had been involving in. I think he was told in short that the case had been fabricated under the interests of a secret organization and it would be closed as soon as the expected result of the active operation was achieved. Most likely, he was guided by a simple motive to “earn” a little money in exchange for registration of the so-called “judicial bail” in his name and conviction of me to admit guilt.

It is true that I had money with me, making up almost all of my savings (I will leave details on this subject without comment).  This amount of money was intended to fulfill my social obligations, for the planned medical operation for vital indications and … for the edition of a book. I mention that the events clearly show that  it was my professional activity that most worried the Transnistrian special services. It is strange, is not it? The Transnistrian KGB (MGB) is very concerned that I should not be engaged in what I have a vocation for.  The amount of money were not “discovered”, but were given by me in custody.  It was returned to me after deducting the sum of the so-called “bail”. Once again, at that time my opponents were not interested in money ( at least, the incident not to seem like a robbery).  I will refrain publicly revealing the truth about what happened after I had left the region to spare the pride of KGB top officials.

So, my release “from detention” was due to posting a bail of $ 1,600. This bail as a measure of restraint, contributed from my money, was also registered in the name of Chiico. While choosing the measure of restraint, I was told that my trustee had not enough money to deposit a bail (even though my trustee was willing to pay the full specified amount). But Chiico stated to my trustee that that one “has no right to contribute a bail, as he was not a “resident” of Transnistria and had nothing to do with me.”  At the same time, however, he did not fail to  appropriate, in breach of the ”services agreement”, an extra $ 380, which he still did not return. This behavior is unworthy for the “Tiraspol Bar Association” chairman, to say the least.

Of course, under these circumstances, I did not acknowledge any legal guilt, as evidenced by the protocol of the first so-called “interrogation” on April 2, 2016. But on April 5, 2016, Chiico, in the presence of the “investigator”, told me: „they” will let you go out (from the cell) if you admit your guilt, otherwise you will not get out of here.” Obviously, I did not have a desire to “entertain” the “worthy” audience with my presence, and I had  reasons to fear further provocative actions. Renouncing my health, property and work, remaining “in detention”, this would be too much. Taking into account what was stated above, I believe that the threat of non-legitimate violence through the use of threats, blackmail or other unlawful actions in the current situation was real, feasible and could really do harm, and I could really be afraid that the threats would be carried out.

It is also clear that any social action leads to an inevitable dialogue between good and evil. In this regard, to prove my right to people directly involved in the conflict is not always correct. However, the right operates by code “legal / illegal”, unequivocally considering to be innocent a person against whom illegal actions have been committed. On the other hand, it should be borne in mind that, just as “any donkey can today <…> blow up an atomic bomb”, as well “any person can be imprisoned for ten years without any explanations…”, having convinced him of guilt.

I will, however, be sincere, in my actions there was also a tactical calculation: if the case is conditioned by the slanderous statements of private persons against me, and I recognized the “guilt” without interested motive, then what is the point of pursuing me in further? Indeed,  the de facto administration of the unrecognized Transnistria was aware or at least had to be conscious of the consequences of its actions, but it deliberately  went to the escalation of illegal violence, maniacally having pursued me thereafter. This distintcly indicates  the true goal of the illegally operating secret organization consisting in my professional destruction and further manipulation of me according to their specific fields of competence.

This and only this can explain why the maniacal persecution initiated by the special services of the unrecognized region continued against the backdrop of a massive, systematic and well thought out campaign of defamation, lies and slander unleashed against me personally. Since April 4, 2016  till the end of June of the same year, the media of Transnistria have become, in essence, the analogue of “Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines”, notorious for the  verdicts of the International Tribunal for Rwanda as “Hate Radio”. In the messages posted in the Transnistrian media and supported by the certain media of the Republic of Moldova and even the Russian Federation, but  coming from the main “instigator”, there are clearly traced motives for hostility and hatred on ethnic grounds and, but strange to say, it is perceived by people not familiar with realities of this region as my civic position. Publications discloses my personal data, thus violating in a most flagrant way the provisions of the “Law on Personal Data”, which provides for the protection of human and civil rights and freedoms while processing his personal data. They rudely and cynically violate my right to privacy, they blatantly and cynically are violating my right to privacy. In fact, we are talking about a continuing information crime committed against me. In this regard, the ECHR noted: “… the effective deterrence against grave acts, where fundamental values and essential aspects of private life are at stake, requires efficient criminal-law provisions”.

So, the publication from April 4, 2016, being posted on the website of the Transnistrian KGB (MGB) (electronic resource: http://kgb-pmr.com/news/423 ) indicates that it was this organization which carried out my detention.  This website posted non-confirmed slanderous information that I was engaged in “extortion” (I guess this fact was supposed to justify somehow their inadequate actions), also it contains information about taking my money out. And this information on the amount of money is presented in such a way as to create a false impression of the extent of my “interests” that did not exist. My personal data (name, surname and, obviously, for better identification my patronymic) is present on the KGB website.

I note that earlier on the KGB website the following news “spot” was reported: “according to the results of the inspection of the activities of the President of Transnistria E. Shevchuk, violations were not found.” Now, this public announcement is removed from the Transnistrian KGB (MGB now) website, and that’s understandable. The case on charges of acceptance of bribes of the then state security service leader, according to the Law on the State Security Service of the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic, was transferred to the Tiraspol City Court. But we proceed from the principle of presumption of innocence and wish the former president a “legal and fair justice” in his home court .

In my case, a deliberate and cynical violation of the fundamental principle of the presumption of innocence in criminal law in all media public announcements  testifies, it is obvious, the secret goal of the developers and immediate executors of an active operation against me was to destroy without trial and investigation a scientist “suspected of espionage” (hence, clearly, frequently usage of a special term “exposed” used, as we know, for this kind of situations). Already on April 4, 2016, before I was presented with any “charges” (they, I recall, were “presented” to me on April 5 of the same year), I was declared a ”criminal”, as well as my activity “criminal” too, and this declaration was posted on the said KGB (MGB) website.  It turns out that the qualifications of deeds in Transnistria is executed not by the justice, but by a specialized secret organization, the fact which is completely inconsistent with the minimum standards of “legislation” in force there. However, what am I talking about?

I mention that the violating of the basic principle the presumption of innocence in criminal law in the media of the Transnistrian “official bodies” calls into question compliance with the provisions of Article 14 of the “Criminal Procedure Code of Transnistria” which enshrines the duty of the investigative committee  and prosecution to comprehensively, fully and objectively investigate the circumstances of the case and, as a consequence, the right to a fair trial. Article 22 of the “Constitution of the PMR” states: Everyone charged with a crime is considered innocent until his guilt is proven in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law and established by a court verdict that has entered into legal force. The accused does not have to prove his innocence. The principle of presumption of innocence fixed in the article 4 of “Criminal Procedure Code of the TMR” provides that the accused is considered innocent until his guilt in the crime is proved in accordance with the procedure provided by law and established by a valid court verdict. Thus, the principle of the presumption of innocence, also enshrined in the Article 11 §1 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (December 10, 1948), in the Article 14 §2 of The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (16 December 1966), in the Article 6 §2. of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, resolutions 2858 (XXVI) on human rights in the administration of justice of the General Assembly of the United Nations (20 December 1971), in my case, taking into account all circumstances surrounded it, was grossly violated.

Needless to say,  the violation of the principle of the presumption of innocence in the media of the Transnistrian official bodies being under control of the Transnistrian KGB and Investigation Committee and, respectively, reflecting the said authorities position, calls into question compliance with the provisions of Article 14 of “Criminal Procedure Code of the TMR”, which fixes the duty of investigation committee and state prosecution to comprehensively, fully and objectively investigate the circumstances of the case, as well as the provisions of Article 41 of the “Criminal Procedure Code of the TMR”, referring to Article 22 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the TMR, providing that circumstances that cast doubt on impartiality serve as the basis for disqualification and, if there are such grounds, the investigator must required to recuse himself. These circumstances, from the outset and for the future, shake the respect of my right to a fair trial within the meaning of Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms when considering my “case” and the related protection of my rights and legitimate interests.

In the publication of April 4, 2016 (an electronic resource: http://novostipmr.com/ru/news/16-04-04/sotrudniki-kgb-pmr-zaderzhali-vzyatochnika ), representing, in fact, a copy-paste from the Transnistrian KGB website, contains deliberately false information that the security agencies “received information about the extortion of a bribe.” There is a violation of the basic principle of the state security activity, enshrined in the Law on the State Security Service of the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic”, the principle of respect for and observance of human and citizen rights and freedoms.

The publication of April 14, 2016 (the electronic resource: http://novostipmr.com/ru/news/16-04-15/docent-korrupcioner-okazalsya-na-svobode ) contains information that proves the provocative and false political motivation of the made-to-order case. The publication itself is written biasedly slanderously and has a pronounced connotation of personal dislike.  My photo image is illegally used here and personal data is also disclosed. In this connection I can not help but notice that with the operational experiment was conducted with obvious violation of the current legislation, a personal photo reproduced on the websites of Transnistrian internet media, where I was depicted  during the abduction, with my money, is testimony to the illegal actions committed against me on the territory outside  the moldavian constitutional authorities control.

It follows from the media reports that the persecution against me was initiated, as previously noted, by far-fetched political motives in order to create a “legend”, which, according to the developers of the active measure, should have worked after my “destruction” on the one hand, and on the other hand to become a necessary conflict component. In addition, the Transnistrian official media reports use specific   vocabulary: “served time”, “caught”, “detained”, “flown the coop”, etc., and  distribute a humiliating judgment about me on the basis of ethnic and national (state) belonging, aimed, in particular, at provoking a feeling of hostility towards me from certain groups of the population. The same reports call for a ban on my professional activities. Think about why does illegal secret organization officers demonstrate such a touching concern for the scientist,  monitoring his actions in the territory that they consider “a neighboring state,” and provocatively resent that I “continue to lecture in the universities of Moldova”? That’s it, it turns out that the Transnistrian KGB (MGB) is intended to indicate to the scientist what, where and when to do, and the fact that I’m giving lectures poses a terrible threat for them and their adherents. Thus, in the media reports, the direct purpose of actions of the Transnistrian de facto power organization is explicitly traced: to inflict maximum harm to me, preventing further my professional activities. The well-planned and organized  campaign unleashed in the media space was definitely aimed at my discrediting. In these circumstances, the only imperative that I believe should be guided by was the evangelical principle: And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them (Eph. 5:11).

The targeted nature of the defamatory information is also clearly traced (in fact, it is a fake of unconfirmed insinuations, intended not for the arguments of rational thinking analyzing the facts in their logical sequence, but solely for the psycho-emotional impact of naive and trusting persons), which indisputably indicates the purposeful character of the committed information crime. Analysis of work of news aggregators for the specified period unequivocally indicates the systematic and purposefulness of the criminal act committed against me. Thus, on April 4, 2016, a massive attack of defamatory information is carried out in all Transnistrian media, including TV and radio (in regularly repeated news reports), and I am directly declared as a “criminal”. Then, on April 14, 2016, the information attack with the indicated political motivation for prosecution was undertaken, targeted to the space of the Russian Federation and the CIS countries (including the news media portal “Rambler”, “Komsomolskaya Pravda in Moldova”). That information contained an unconcealed negative connotation which, according to the organizers of the active measures, in addition to creating this “legend”, should cause resentment towards me. Later, on June 22, 2016, an attack was launched on the information space of Moldova with an almost unconcealed appeal to the official authorities of the republic to destroy my reputation in the professional sphere. At this stage, in view of the apparent exhaustion of imagination of the  Transnistrian KGB staff, the officers of the “Investigative Committee of the TMR” (web-report “Moldova+Justice”) joined the aggressive persecution, as suddenly having remembered that they had been on the territory of the Republic of Moldova. In this regard, I remind you that  in the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova there is no “TMR Investigative Committee”.

Such a closer and obviously inadequate behavior of the de facto  power organizations of Transnistria continuing the maniacal persecution of me (if you do not know the principles of secret organizations, all this clearly resembles psychedelic delirium) did not remain without the attention of the legitimate law enforcement authorities of the Republic of Moldova. Over the incident involving persons who have committed and are committing lasting serious crimes, the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Moldova have initiated a criminal case, and I was recognized as a victim. I consider the damage caused to me by illegal persecution on the territory of Transnistria, taking into consideration all the attendant circumstances, fundamentally non-recoverable.

Until August 30, 2016, “The TMR Investigative Committee” did not undertake any “investigative actions” with my participation, and  I was “called” to Tiraspol on this day. If anyone does not understand why it was August 30, I will explain. It was the eve of the new academic year. But the hope in the massive criminal campaign against me unleashed by Transnistrian media under the control of illegal power organizations remained unfulfilled, and I continued working in Chisinau in the planned volume of workload. By this date, informants from Chisinau had notified the illegal organization that they did not manage to ”delete” me. The executors of the active measures in these conditions had no choice but ”to bring the case to court”. It is true that certain officials of the Transnistrian authorities  ”bounded by blood” and fueled by banal greed (you should’ve heard Bratanciuc telling enthusiastically me how they would divide the scientist’s money de facto appropriated),  became themselves hostages to the deed. I note that during and later on the whole so-called “investigation”, I consciously prevented any actions that could be interpreted as “obstruction of justice and preliminary investigation”. My demand was one: the prescribed respect for the law and justice.

In the present unplanned situation, the “investigative committee” was tasked with falsifying evidence in such a way as to “blame” me for deliberately unlawful acts, which would formally give the appearance of “legality” of the so-called “investigative experiment”. They used the argument that the examination list, in which I had marked grades during the provocation, was invalid “in connection with the expiration of its validity.”

Obviously, if the examination list was invalid, it means that the notes made in it do not entail any legal consequences and, thus, my actions did not have the executive function. In addition, the illegality of the action (inaction) implies the actions of the person were deliberately unlawful. The illegal actions of an official  presume illegal actions that did not proceed from his official powers or were committed contrary to the interests of the service, as well as actions containing signs of a crime or other offense. In other words, the violation, to which the blanket norm of the corresponding article refers, should be sanctioned in itself. According to the principle “there is no crime, there is no punishment without the law”, the offense should be provided not just by the norm of law, but only by one that contains a sanction. Regulations on the  end-of-year examinations and tests and the one on the registration of repeated training in the Shevchenko Transnistrian State University, which allegedly were violated by me (according to  Yana Radchenko  testifying against me)  do not contain normative provisions that entail sanctions, but only establish general requirements for the order of examinations and tests. Violations of these requirements can have only disciplinary consequences applied in compliance with the established rules on disciplinary liability. On the other hand, putting marks is in itself a legitimate action, clearly, and my actions as a professor deceived by Tazetdinov’s behavior have been perceived by me as legitimate. I had no opportunity to check the validity of the examination list by addressing to the administration of faculty because of its absence that day on a workplace. It is also obvious that if, according to the official of the faculty Radchenko, the exam list was invalid, then, consequently, the grades marked in it did not have any legal consequences for Tazetdinov, that is, it was not committed in his benefit.

I consciously presented this passage being a component of one of the petitions declared by me later on in the “court”  in order to demonstrate the apparent absurdity of what was happening.

However, I insisted that the notorious examination list No. 106 at the time of the assessment was valid in the sense that it had an inscription about its extension (I had no possibility to verify in another way the validity of the internal document that would not report any rights without entering this data in the summary examination list, for obvious reasons, and it was not my duty).  Below I present a copy of the original examination-and-test list No. 106 for taking the differences in the educational curricula of Aleksander Eduardovich Tazetdinov in order to remove further doubts and demonstrate what the so-called “case” is, due to which I am being persecuted in Transnistria:

At the time of the referring the case to a court, I had a copy of the original examination list, but, of course, I  saved it for an emergency, believing that dozens of arguments, explicitly testifying the unlawful actions of the organizers of the provocation, would be sufficient to terminate the case for lack of corpus delicti. However, any arguments, each of which in compliance with the basic principle of legality was sufficient in itself to terminate the case on the indicated grounds, was ignored by both the “Transnistrian Investigative Committee” and later on by the “Tiraspol City Court”. In this regard, I mention that, throughout this “process” representing a tragicomic show initiated in order to achieve a certain goal, at each of its stages I paused leaving a chance for opponents to stop, think, proceeded from the maxim: “forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing “(Luke 23, 34).

Nevertheless, as you can see, the exam list turned out to be quite legitimate, and the marks I put down were credited (the exam list was extended for the second time until June 23, no one knows what year, but must be with cushion of time, anyway obviously after June 15, 2016). As they say, and Q.E.D.: quod ab initio vitiosum est non potest tractu temporis convalescere, that which is void in the beginning cannot become valid by lapse of time. Needless to say, the “investigation committee” was obliged to retrieve the original exam list and attach it to the case materials, especially since I applied for this during the preliminary investigation. It is obvious why this was not done.

Thus, the so-called “case” on which I am persecuted in Transnistria, consists of completely falsified evidence and is nothing more than the usual fake, which masks the active measures. Nevertheless, according to the “investigators” version on April 2, 2016, I not only committed “unlawful actions” out of “interested motives”, but also an “official forgery” at the same time, evidently it was done for more impression. The “indictment” and materials on the so-called “case” were transferred to the “Tiraspol City Court” on December 19, 2016, exactly with this formulation.

In this connection, it should be noted once again that a steady interest from the power de facto organizations of Transnistria in me, expressed in harassing me after I long ago had terminated any relations there, testifies only one thing: it was originally aimed at the destruction of my professional and personal life. The fact of the actions against my rights and interests that grossly and cynically violated basic human rights and the fundamental principles of international law, also has a moral dimension: the rule of force suppresses the force of rule.  The de facto transnistrian regime, powerful in relation to me, demonstrates that it has limitless opportunities under the circumstances to cause evil against the one who came there at their invitation, solely for educational purposes.

At the “trial” on February 21, 2017, I declared my complete legal innocence, and my advocate from the Republic of Moldova filed a petition   supported by me on the termination of the criminal case on the basis of an insuperable procedural obstacle in court. Our petition was based on the fact that the “investigator” Bratanciuc had referred the “case” to another “investigator” for a certain period of time (summer of 2016) and later on had accepted another “case” and with a different qualification for consideration, while actually had been continuing to conduct the case on my “accusation”. It follows that all further procedural actions of Bratanciuc on the “case” against me, starting from July 27, 2016, including the “indictment” drawn up and signed by him, in principle lacks a proper legal basis. Nevertheless, the court did not consider the defense’s arguments worthy of attention. It rejected the petition and, in violation of Art. 205  of the TMR Code of Criminal Procedure,   continued to examine the “case” on the merits. It can not be said that the judge (chief of the “Tiraspol City Court”) leading the “trial” did not realize the evident absolute illegality of the situation. And when choosing between legality and justice, on the one hand, and personal interests on the other, she had to proceed from the latter ones: after all, the resolution on reliability for the next cadence must be obtained from the Transnistrian KGB (MGB) , and there she would not have been forgiven such an opportunistic act. Anyway, the noted violation in my case of the basic constitutional principle of legality, which excludes the possibility of issuing a justified and lawful decision on the case, gave reason to doubt the impartiality and objectivity of the “Tiraspol City Court”. Thus, there is a complete substantive legal and procedural inconsistency of the “case” fabricated for the active measure.

A systematic and endless violation of fundamental human rights that had lasted since a “criminal case” had been initiated against me, as well as the search for an answer to the question of who ultimately was responsible for their violation on the  territory of Transnistria, prompted me to apply with appropriate application to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russian Federation. I received the answer (for which I express my deep gratitude), which stated that “Russia did not exercised  and does not exercise now the jurisdiction on the territory of Transnistria being a part of the Republic of Moldova which is a sovereign state, a member of the UNO and the Council of Europe”.

Further, on March 17, 2017, in view of the persistent recommendations given to me by the official authorities of the Republic of Moldova  (I had no right to ignore the position of the official authorities of the Republic of Moldova on this issue, for obvious reasons), and also seeing that lawlessness at the level of the Transnistrian “justice” can not be overcome, I did not come to the Tiraspol City Court for the next trial scheduled for this date. At the same date, the “court” of the self-proclaimed republic made a determination to suspend of proceedings, to arrest in absentia of me, to appropriate my money deposited as a legal bail in the sum  of $ 1,600, and to declare me “wanted” on my national territory.

The appropriation of the “judicial bail” introduced in violation of the legislation in force in the Transnistrian region on a knowingly unlawfully initiated case is considered by me as an attempt on the right of private property. Protocol 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms provides that natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law. Well, the scientist’s appropriated money (this is another fundamental scientific work I did not write) would improve the state of affairs in the budget of the self-proclaimed republic and certainly will reflect on the well-being of the persons involved in this. The situation reflects that someone in the post-Soviet space has an undisguised interest in making social stagnation worse, and this “someone” called himself.

It should be noted, however,  that the Constitution and the legislation in force of the Republic of Moldova does not provide for the functioning of any institutions ensuring the effective implementation of the right to protection from  the transnistrian authorities attacks. The prosecutor’s office of the Republic of Moldova (the assessment of the effectiveness of its activities will be given by the European Court of Human Rights on the basis of the consideration of my complaint), as well as other competent bodies of the Republic, do not exercise effective control over Transnistria, and therefore can not provide protection for violated rights and legitimate interests of citizens who fall under the repressive actions of illegal armed forces in the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova. This is a flagrant violation of Article 13 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that everyone, whose rights and freedoms recognized by the Convention are violated, have the right to an effective remedy before a public authority.

So, after a formal appeal against the decision of the “Tiraspol City Court” in the so-called “Supreme Court of the TMR” with a deliberately predetermined outcome (there is nothing to comment on), in view of the flagrant violation of a number of fundamental provisions of the conventional norms on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms and unwillingness of certain officials of the de facto official authorities of Transnistria to listen to reason, with the assistance of lawyers from the Republic of Moldova, I lodged a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights.

Thus, based on the content of the foregoing, it follows that as a result of the actions of the unconstitutional authorities of Transnistria, fundamental human rights under the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms have been violated, namely: the personal dignity, right to physical and mental integrity (Article 3 of the Convention); right to liberty and security of person (Article 5 of the Convention); right to a fair trial (many times) (Article 6 of the Convention); right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 of the Convention); right to freedom of expression (Article 10 of the Convention); right to an effective remedy (Article 13 of the Convention); right to own property (Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the Convention).

The answer to the question about reasons of the imposed conflict receiving clear international concern and causing a wide response, was given.  Who benefits from this conflict is still an open question. But the time will come and, it is assumed, this question will be answered.

I foresee a reasonable remark why I have not earlier published material relating to the circumstances of what happened in Transnistria. I answer: first, as follows from the above, I have taken and will take action to protect rights and legitimate interests being violated, grossly and cynically, with a public challenge; second, for obvious reasons, I can make public the actions taken in this regard (of course, not all) with a certain and necessary under the circumstances caution; thirdly, I do not hide that, like all other interested parties (and to date in the conflict somehow several recognized and one unrecognized jurisdictions are involved, dozens, if not hundreds, of people are involved in it), I observed not without interest the reaction and behavior of the people involved in it. After all, for me as a scientist, what has happened is also an object of observation, food for thought and conclusions, and not only legal ones, but also social and moral. Actually, it is  in conflictual and crisis situations that the true human features are best manifested.

Nevertheless, taking into account the real situation, the artificial involvement of me in the pathological forms of social action, given the obvious engagement of what was happening, I attribute full liability for what is happening to the de facto authorities of Transnistria. Whatever, wherever and whenever happens to me, my relatives and my property will be considered to have occurred in connection with the conflict in which I was involved by the secret organization operating in the territory of the unrecognized Transnistria.

Oleg Halabudenko

April 2018

Chisinau.