CCPR/C/116/D/2231/2012 officer physically attacked the author’s lawyer on the premises of the police station and at the prosecutor’s office while the police and local prosecutors refused to intervene. The police terminated one of the lawyer’s only private meetings with the author after 10 minutes; throughout the entirety of the two-month-long investigation, they had less than two hours together to discuss the case. 2.6 The author claims that he was tried along with seven co-defendants in the district court, beginning on 2 September 2010. The trial was flagrantly unfair and amounted to a denial of justice. The author’s lawyer was not able to participate in the first day of the trial because he had been notified of the hearing only the night before and he lived in Bishkek, a 10-hour drive away. The author pleaded not guilty to all charges, as he had been at home when the policeman was killed, but the court did not permit his lawyers to present evidence in his favour. In the absence of the author’s lawyer on the first day of the trial, the court heard 16 prosecution witnesses, including 14 police officers from the Bazar-Korgon police station. 2.7 The author submits that relatives of the deceased police officer constantly threatened and intimidated the author’s defence team, his seven co-defendants and potential witnesses inside and outside the courtroom. The relatives stated, for example, that they had “hired killers for every defence lawyer” participating in the hearings. The presiding judge made no effort to protect defence counsel or maintain order in the courtroom. The atmosphere of intimidation in the courtroom prevented defence counsel from making legal applications, calling witnesses for the defence or cross-examining prosecution witnesses. 2.8 The author and his co-defendants were also beaten during the trial. After the first hearing, police opened the cage in which they were held and beat them right in the courtroom. Later that evening, 20 police officers beat the author and the other defendants, who were handcuffed and unable to protect themselves, for several hours in the backyard of the police station where they were held during the trial. While beating them, the officers told them they must remain quiet and give only “yes” or “no” answers in the courtroom. 2.9 Without considering any evidence presented by the defence, the district court held the last hearing on 8 September 2010. During the hearing, the lawyer, Mr. Toktakunov, reiterated that the author had been tortured. He also complained about the lack of adequate access to his client and to the criminal case file. On 15 September, the district court found the author guilty of instigating ethnic hatred, inciting disorder and complicity in the murder of the police officer as well as attempted murder of other officers, calling for the mayor to be taken hostage and possession of 10 rounds of ammunition. The court sentenced him to life imprisonment. It also convicted all seven of his co-defendants, sentencing four to life imprisonment and the other three to prison terms of between 9 and 20 years. 2.10 Lawyers for the author and his co-defendants appealed the convictions to the ZhalalAbad Regional Court and on 9 October 2010, the author and his co-defendants were transferred to Suzak police station in preparation for the appeal hearings. On arrival at the station, they were taken to the backyard, forced to remove their clothing and beaten by police officers wearing black masks who told the author: “If you had not written against the police … we would not be beating you.” 2.11 On 23 October 2010, the hearing was transferred to the courthouse in Tash-Kumyr village. Upon arrival at the police station there, the author’s medication was confiscated and his co-defendants were again stripped and beaten by masked police officers. After one day of hearings in Tash-Kumyr, the venue was again changed, to the courthouse in Nooken village. The appeal hearings before the Zhalal-Abad Regional Court in both Tash-Kumyr and Nooken were characterized by violations similar to those that had occurred at the trial. In addition, relatives of the deceased officer shouted at and threatened the defence lawyers during the hearings. 3