PACE report weighs fairness of trials in criminal cases concerning espionage
Strasbourg, 21.09.2006 – Igor Sutyagin, Valentin Danilov and Mikhail Trepashkin, all convicted of espionage following high-profile cases in Russia, should be set free without further delay as there are strong indications that they did not receive fair trials, according to a report of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) made public today.
The report, prepared by Christos Pourgourides (Cyprus, EPP/CD) and approved unanimously by PACE’s Legal Affairs Committee at a meeting in Greece on 15 September, said judges and juries were changed repeatedly without adequate reason, the defence was unable to question experts about the secret nature of the information allegedly divulged, and the proceedings lacked openness. In the Danilov case, even the judgment itself was secret.
In a draft resolution, the committee said the series of high-profile espionage cases against scientists, journalists and lawyers in Russia had had “a chilling effect” on other members of these professional groups. “The climate of ‘spy mania’ fuelled by these cases, and controversial statements of senior government representatives, are obstacles to the healthy development of civil society in this country,” it added.
The committee – which was looking into cases concerning espionage or divulging state secrets in all 46 Council of Europe member states – also expressed concern that the German, Swiss and Italian, as well as US, authorities had recently threatened, or even attempted to prosecute media editors, journalists or other “whistleblowers” for alleged breaches of official secrecy, in particular in the context of recent reports on unlawful CIA activities. It cited the Shayler and “Spycatcher” cases in the United Kingdom and the Schirra case in Germany.
“Legislation on official secrecy in many Council of Europe member states is rather vague or otherwise overly broad in that it could be construed in such a way as to cover a wide range of legitimate activities of journalists, scientists, lawyers or other human rights defenders,” the committee said.
The draft resolution calls on member states and the European Court of Human Rights to “find an appropriate balance between the State interest in preserving official secrecy on the one hand and freedom of expression, the free flow of information on scientific matters, and society’s interest in exposing abuses of power on the other hand”.
The report, which contains detailed analysis of several cases, is likely to be debated by parliamentarians from the 46 member states at a forthcoming plenary session of the Assembly.
