Thuswise, ‘extramural’ court sessions seem to be illegal for the following reasons:
● ‘extramural’ court sessions are neither governed by any of the national laws and regulations, nor by any international standard in the field of the right to a fair trial ratified by Kazakhstan;
● conduction of extramural court sessions in police department buildings violates the principle of separation of powers as such court proceedings take place within the territory of the executive authorities;
● extramural court sessions do not comply with the principle of transparency because police departments are classified among secured objects and, consequently, access of observers and mass media representatives is restricted thereto;
● extramural court sessions contradict the principle of equality of arms since court sessions are conducted in the premises of police authorities that brought detainees to administrative liability.
All above-said constitutes a direct violation of both the national legislation and international standards of a fair trial, especially under the total Internet shut-down, which made it impossible to ensure the principle of transparency of judicial proceedings. In this regard, the state represented by the extramural court restricted procedural rights of Alexandra Osipova.
According to the Siracusa Principles
on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the ICCPR, the state has a right to restrict human rights and freedoms where it is strictly necessary only. In doing so, the Siracusa Principles prescribe that the ‘necessity’ of such restrictions is justified in three instances only: when it responds to a pressing public or social need, when it pursues a legitimate aim, and when it is proportionate to that aim
In the instant case the state does not provide any clear explanations of why extramural court sessions have been practiced. No pressing need to introduce ‘extramural’ court proceedings, which infringe procedural rights of the citizens and violate principles of judicial independence, has been established. In this context, restriction of civil rights is arbitrary.