CCPR/C/112/D/1972/2010 verdict against the author. It further submits that, on 20 September 2005, the Chamber for Criminal and Administrative Offences of the Supreme Court reviewed the author’s case following his cassation appeal and rejected the appeal. That ruling was amended by the Plenum of the Supreme Court on 24 October 2005, which reviewed the case based on a presentation by the President of the Court. The Plenum amended the verdict in the sentencing part, replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment. Thereafter the author filed a request to the Qaradag District Court to amend his sentence from life imprisonment to 15 years’ imprisonment. On 24 October 2005, the Qaradag District Court partially satisfied the author’s request, reducing the individual sentences for some of the offences. The Court determined that the aggregated sentence for all the offences, of which the author was convicted, would be life imprisonment. On 9 December 2005, the Court of Appeal rejected the author’s appeal against that judgement. On 28 March 2006, the Supreme Court rejected the author’s application to restore the deadline for appealing against the above decision of the Court of Appeal. 6.2 The State party submits that the original verdict against the author was issued based on the Code of Criminal Procedure in force until 1 September 2000. Article 343 of that Code provided that cassation appeals could be filed against all verdicts, except those issued by the Supreme Court. It further submits that, based on article 4 of the Fundamental Principles of Criminal Legislation of the USSR and the Soviet Republics, individuals were tried in accordance with the criminal legislation of the Republic on the territory of which the offence was committed. Based on article 4 of the Criminal Code of the Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic, adopted on 8 December 1960, which was in force at the time when the author committed offences and was convicted, all individuals that had committed offences on the territory of that Republic were prosecuted in accordance with that Code. The codes of all Republics that were part of the Soviet Union contained such provisions. Since the author had committed crimes on the territories of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and of the Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic, he was also convicted and sentenced based on the Criminal Codes of those Republics. In the 24 October 2005 decision of the Qaradag District Court, all offences committed by the author had been qualified under the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan that had entered into force on 1 September 2000 and his punishment was determined under the provisions of that Code. 6.3 Regarding the author’s allegations that he and other defendants and their representatives had been illegally removed from the courtroom, the State party submits that the author and three other defendants had indeed been removed from the courtroom by an order of the court dated 12 July 1991 for systematic violations of the court order and insubordination to the orders of the presiding judge, based on article 280 of the Criminal Procedure Code in force at the time. The order of the court was lawful and well reasoned. The State party further maintains that the author was proposed a defence attorney (Mr. Nadzhafov), that the author accepted the attorney and that the attorney represented him throughout the proceedings and was present at the announcement of the verdict. The members of the court panel that tried the author went to the detention centre where the accused were detained and, on 12 and 13 November 1991, read out the verdict to them and informed them of their right to request a supervisory review. 6.4 Regarding the author’s allegations that he and other defendants had been tortured, the State party submits that the above allegations were reviewed and could not be confirmed. 6.5 Regarding the author’s allegation that there were no legal grounds for the commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, the State party refers to the decision as to admissibility of the First Section of the European Court of Human Rights in 10