My house arrest was extended today until mid-January 2015.
Of course, we asked why this was necessary and how exactly I could obstruct the investigation (which ended long ago) or intimidate witnesses (of whom, apparently, there are hardly any left—the prosecution is calling one person a day), but these are all rhetorical questions. You might as well address a fire hydrant and show it the Criminal Procedure Code.
Today they also questioned the 20th "prosecution witness." No surprises: no one did anything illegal; I consider the charges absurd. In other words, much the same as every witness before.
Good news came immediately after the hearing ended: the European Court of Human Rights has agreed to consider the "Kirovles case."
The full text outlining the substance of the case, our complaint, and the questions the ECHR is putting to the parties can be read here.
For those who do not know English, here is the explanation: the ECHR is asking the Russian state whether the trial in the "Kirovles case" complied with Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. It is especially interested in compliance with paragraphs 1, 2, and 3(d). These paragraphs are:
1 - the right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time by an impartial tribunal
2 - the presumption of innocence
3(d) - the right to examine witnesses for the prosecution and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses for the defense under the same conditions as witnesses for the prosecution
The ECHR is also asking whether the proceedings violated Articles 7 and 18 of the Convention. These articles are, respectively, "No punishment without law" and "Limitation on use of restrictions on rights."
The Russian government is now required to answer the ECHR's questions, after which the case will be considered on its merits.