The decision of the investigator Chumachenko, issued on January, 20 2003 on the case #110351 regarding obscure disappearance of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij, in which we are identified as victims, suspended the investigation of the case because no person who could be brought to criminal responsibility was found.
We consider this decision to be unfounded, unlawful and subject to repeal.

1. It is claimed in the decision that during the investigation of the case "different versions of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij were examined and worked through: version, connected with business activities of Mr. Krasovskij; version, connected with political and business activities of Mr. Gonchar; version, connected with their disappearance being feigned; version, connected with an attempt to steal a prestigious jeep "Cherokee". A version, voiced by the media about participation of Mr. Pavlichenko — commander of the military unit #3214, in Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij disappearance." But it is not indicated in the decision whether these versions are somehow proved (even partly) or not.

From the analysis of this document follows that the investigation was successful when working on the version connected with the politically motivated violent disappearance of Mr. Gonchar — member of the Belarusian Parliament, Chairperson of the Parliament, leader of the oppositional to the President of the Republic of Belarus forces.

2. Materials of investigation make obvious participation in the crime certain state officials of the Republic of Belarus.It is important to point out that some documents, which where published by the independent media where recognized by the investigators as reliable and related to the present criminal case. The facts and events, which are proved by these documents according to the rules of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus, have to be evaluated together with other evidences found out by the investigators. Among these documents there are: report of Mr. Lapatik from November, 11 2000; report of Mr. Alkajev, November, 23 2000; record of the interrogation of Mr. Alkajev as a witness from November, 24 2000, which was held by the deputy of a prosecutor’s office chief Mr. Kazakov; record of the taking out of the pistol and the registration book (of the arms and ammunition giving out and receiving to the personnel of the investigator’s isolation ward) from November, 24 2000 with the records from May, 5 1993; the record of the examination of this book; decision regarding the assignment of the criminality expert’s examination of the pistol "PB-9"” # PO57C from November, 27 2000, which was issued by the chief of the operative investigation group Mr. Branchel; expert’s conclusion # 184 from November, 27 2000 on the case # 414100; receipt of the Cannel Alkajev, Ministry of the Internal Affairs armed forces from November, 28 2000 proving the fact that he got the pistol "PB-9" # PO57C in the holster with an extra magazine and muffler and the arms registration book from Mr. Branchel.

From the report of the Minister of the Internal Affairs Deputy, the chief of the Criminal police Mr. Lapatik to the Minister of the Internal Affairs Mr. Naumov from November, 21 2000 is obvious that Mr. Lapatik knew that in April 1999 Mr. Sheiman (Secretary of the Security Council of the Republic of Belarus) gave to the Minister of the Internal Affairs Mr. Sivakov instructions to let the commander of Special Unit of Quick Reaction Pavlichenko (military unit #3214) see in the investigator’s isolation ward #1 of the Minsk region executive committee department of the Internal affairs the execution by shooting of a sentenced person and the burial procedure. This assignment Mr. Sivakov gave to the chief of the investigator’s isolation ward #1 Alkajev and Mr. Pavlichenko was let to see the procedure.

In the report it is said also that Mr. Sheiman gave Mr. Pavlichenko instructions to physically eliminate former Minister of Internal Affairs Mr. Zakharenko. A special department, with Mr. Vasilchenko at the head (Presidential Security Service), was in charge for the information support regarding location of Mr. Zakharenko. "Capture and subsequent elimination of Mr. Zakharenko was carried out by a group of military men from special armed forces with Mr. Pavlichenko at the head. Using similar scheme Pavlichenko and his group carried out capture and elimination of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij," — is indicated in the report. It is written in the report that the place of Mr. Zakharenko, Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij burial is a special burial area in the North cemetery, Minsk.

The circumstances, which are laid down in the report of Mr. Lapatik, are confirmed by the information from the report from November 23, 2000 of the chief of the investigator’s isolation ward #1 Alkajev to the Minister of the Internal Affairs Naumov, as well as from the record of the interrogation of Mr. Alkajev as a witness in the case #414100 from November, 24 2000. In these documents Mr. Alkajev testifies that at the request of the former Minister of Internal Affairs Sivakov he indeed let Mr. Pavlichenko (commander of Special Unit of Quick Reaction, military unit #3214) see the execution by shooting, and two times (April, 4 1999 and September, 16 1999) gave through Mr. Dik and Mr. Kolesnik to Mr. Sivakov the pistol "PB-9" # PO57C with a muffler, which was used to carry out this execution.

In the appealed decision it is stated "with large extent of probability" that in the night of September, 17 1999 Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij "were kidnapped with the use of violence by persons, not identified by the investigation, and taken away in an unknown direction". This happened near building in Fabrichnaja Street.

The information, which the decision of the investigator Chumachenko contains, gives the possibility to consider the following fact proved and established: kidnapping of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij was carried out by a group of people (not less than 6), who were using a red "BMW" and probably an "Audi". Additional forces, who watched the territories near the public bath in Fabrichnaja Street, covered the capture operation. This was done to prevent random people from appearing in this place. This information proves the statement of Mr. Lapatik that forces of Special Units of Quick Reaction (Mr. Pavlichenko) and of the Presidential Security Service (Mr. Vasilchenko) were used (report from November 21 2000 to the Minister of the Internal Affairs Naumov). One should keep in mind that in the same time period the investigation of a criminal case, which Mr. Gonchar was charged with, was being held. The case was connected with the participation of Mr. Gonchar in the alternative presidential elections (March — June 1999) as a Chairman of the Central Electoral Committee. Mr. Gonchar was watched (it was an operational measure), including his movement around Minsk, his phone talks were tapped. These actions were proved by a publication in the newspaper "Sovetskaja Belorussia" ("Soviet Belarus") his confidential phone talks with a Canadian businessman Mr. Harry Ostrovskij.

In the investigator's decision the circumstances of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij violent kidnapping are laid down. According to the words of a witness during the night of September, 17 1999 there was some noise, men's screams (including cries for help) in the area of the public bath. A person, not identified by the investigation, dressed in the uniform and saying that he is a policeman was asking people whether they have heard any noise in the street. Other witnesses testify that near the public bath building they were stopped by some young men, who tried to stop them with the help of odd and useless questions. One of the witnesses says that in the night of September, 17 1999 around 23 00 she and her daughter were walking by the building of a photo studio "Vilija", behind which the public bath is situated. "Suddenly a young man came up to them from behind a corner, where the public bath is situated, and started to ask various questions. She had a feeling that with the help of the senseless talks he is trying to delay her and her daughter at that place".

Thus one can say that the investigator has established presence of a special criminal group in the armed forces. But except this statement no further steps were taken.

3. At the crime place there were found fragments of a filament lamp, as well as a lamp-socket, which was not designed for placing on Jeep "Cherokee" (production year 1990), which was the property of Mr. Krasovskij; car’s breaking tracks and a track of a car’s stroke against the tree, from which some samples of paint were taken.
According to the expert’s conclusion there were found some micro-tractions of acrylic paint of a scarlet color on the two presented pieces of wood. The paint can be subject to a comparative analysis and establishment of a generic belonging when having a comparison sample. Micro-layers on the wood are a result of a strong dynamic contact.

According to the information provided by Mr. Alkajev and the witness Mr. Metelskij, former member of the Special Unit of Quick Reaction (unit #3214), the red "BMW" (property of the car-company of the Special Unit of Quick Reaction) was used by major Pavlichenko (unit #3214).

But the investigators haven’t checked whether the cars, which were at the disposal of the Special Unit of Quick Reaction sub-units, or other special units of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs, or of the Presidential Security Service (Mr. Vasilchenko), or of the Security Council (Mr. Sheiman), were used while kidnapping Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij in the night of September, 17 1999. The cars were not examined in order to find characteristic damage on them and to conduct a car-identification research taking into account found at the crime place tracks of treads, fragments of glass, samples of paint etc. The documentation of the indicated car departures on September, 16-17 1999 was not checked either, it was not established, what was the aim of using the car, who was in charge of the departures, who was the driver.

"When these people were shot they were killed "In the name of the President", article by the reporter Koktysh was published in the newspaper "Narodnaja Volja" (People’s Will), # 154 from August 22, 2001. The article contains an interview with a member of the Special Unit of Quick Reaction (unit #3214), who wished to stay anonymous. In the interview he refers that in the violent captures of Mr. Zakharenko, Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij were participating certain soldiers of the unit #3214: lieutenant Koklin, warrant-officers Balynin and Murashko, Budko, Novatorskij, Mekijanets, together with the commander of Special Unit of Quick Reaction Pavlichenko. When going to Minsk they used a red "BMW", "Audi" and other cars, which were in the car park of the unit.
The facts and events laid down in the article are confirmed by the information gained during the interrogation of the witness Metelskij, former member of the Special Unit of Quick Reaction (unit #3214).

The decision of the investigator Chumachenko does not indicate whether there were taken any attempts to search and find cars with the above mentioned damages and the Jeep “Cherokee”. No soldiers, including the indicated above ones, of the unit #3214 were interrogated, no cars belonging to the unit were examined, no measures were taken to make photorobots of persons, who were asking people in the night of September, 17 1999 near the public bath building, to find and identify them.

4. The questions regarding illegal issuing of the pistol for noiseless shooting (special pistol "PB-9" # PO57C) by the officials of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs of the Republic of Belarus, that happened in the same time with the disappearances of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij, were investigated superficially and incomplete.

The report of Mr. Alkajev from November, 23 2000, record of his interrogation as a witness from November 23, 2000 and the record of the examination of the armament taking out registration book make evident that the execution pistol was issued by order of the former Minister of the Internal Affairs Sivakov to Mr. Dik (given out on April, 30 1999, returned on May, 15 1999) and to Mr. Kolesnikov (given out on September, 16 1999, returned on September, 18 1999).

Therefore, it is established that the execution pistol was issued on dates preceding the disappearances of Mr. Zaharenko (in the night of May, 7 1999), Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij (in the night of September, 17 1999), as well as the pistol's return following them.

As was officially established by the investigation the pistol for noiseless shooting was used for "special actions", but not for firing practice. But the deputy of the Minister of the Internal Affairs Chvankin refused to provide any details about what kind of actions took place, who and why was using the illegally given out pistol.

According to its’ characteristics the pistol "PB-9" is not a distance aimed shooting arm and is used for noiseless fire point-blank shooting. The pistol has a muffler and a flash eliminator. When shooting the shot is made from a very close distance in the occipital part of the convicted person’s head.

Mr. Alkajev says that using this particular pistol Mr. Sheiman, Mr. Sivakov and Mr. Pavlichenko worked out a scheme of so called "clean murder", which is similar to the shooting procedure of the people sentenced to capital punishment (Mr. Alkajev’s interview, appendix "Dlja Sluzhebnogo Polzovanija" ("For Office Use") to the newspaper "Belorusskaja Delovaja Gazeta" ("Belarusian Business Newspaper") # 2 (13), February 2003).

Mr. Chvankin, being interrogated as a witness, testified that in the end of April former Minister of the Internal Affairs of the Republic of Belarus Sivakov gave him an order to take in a police department a pistol for noiseless shooting. Carrying out this order he, being at that time deputy of the Minister of the Internal Affairs, gave the order to the deputy of the chief of the Equipment and Rear Arming Department of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs Dik to take the pistol. Mr. Dik issued an official order to give him permission to use the pistol for firing practice of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs central staff. After getting the permission Mr. Dik took the pistol for noiseless shooting "PB-9" # PO57C in the investigator’s isolation ward #1 (the chief — Mr. Alkajev) and gave it to Mr. Chvankin. Mr. Chvankin claims that he gave the pistol to Mr. Sivakov and it was used afterwards for carrying out special operations, and not for firing practice. But during the interrogation he refused to provide any information regarding what kind of "special operations" were carried out, who was the chief of these operations, who and for what purposes was using the pistol.

In the appealed decision the investigator points out that because of the refusal of Mr. Chvankin to provide necessary information regarding the use of the pistol "PB-9" a special inquiry with the request to give information about whether any actions were carried out with the use of the pistol was sent to the Ministry of the Internal Affairs. The answer, in the opinion of the investigator, "does not make possible to make any definite conclusion whether the pistol, received by Mr. Dik and M. Kolesnik in the investigator’s isolation ward #1, was used in any operative and investigation actions within the Ministry of the Internal Affairs".

If so, why Mr. Chvankin, who refused to provide important for the investigation information, was not brought to criminal responsibility? Why did not the supervising prosecutor make a recurring inquiry to the Ministry of the Internal Affairs chief staff regarding the need to provide for the investigation full and truthful information about the use of the pistol "PB-9", together with obtaining (taking out) the document, proving the reported information? Why are contradictions in the witness testimony of Mr. Sivakov, Mr. Chvankin, Mr. Dik and Mr. Kolesnik not eliminated?

The witness Kolesnik testified that he by the order of Mr. Sivakov went to the isolation ward, took the pistol for noiseless shooting and gave it to Mr. Chvankin. During the investigation it is established that Mr. Kolesnik, being the adjutant of the Minister of the Internal Affairs Sivakov, carried out the order. Evidence of this event are the records (together with his signature) in the arms giving out registration book of the isolation ward #1 from September, 19 1999 — for taking the pistol "PB-9" # PO57C with the magazine, and from September, 18 1999 — for giving the pistol back. At the recurring interrogation Mr. Kolesnik changed his testimony and said that after receiving the pistol he stored it in the safe in the office and by Mr. Sivakov order handed in the pistol to the isolation ward # 1.

Mr. Sivakov, when being interrogated as a witness, said that he does not remember whether he gave any orders of the kind either to Mr. Chvankin or Mr. Kolesnik. But no confrontations of the interrogated persons in order to eliminate considerable contradictions in the testimonies of the witnesses were carried out and the reasons why Mr. Kolesnik changed his testimony were not found out. This is a violation of the norms (particularly Art. 222) of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus.

The decision of the chief of the investigation group Branchel from November, 27 2000 to carry out an expert examination on the criminal case # 414100 and other records of the case make clear that the pistol taken out from the isolation ward # 1 could have been used in the circumstances of the murder of the Nasibov family; of the Agajev brother and sister; of the leader of the unregistered Belarusian regional association "Russian Nation Unity" Mr. Samojlov; of Zhlobin and Marjina Gorka citizens Yasko and Sojko; when kidnapping Mr. Grachev — the chief inspector of the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Belarus; of businessman Mr. Bykov; when kidnapping people with their following disappearance — the operator of the Russian Broadcasting Company "Russian Public Television" Belarusian Bureau Mr. Zavadskij; the Director of Marjina Gorka transport enterprise Mr. Kotov, and in other crimes.

According to the expert’s conclusion # 184 from November, 27 2000 (the expert – deputy of the chief of the Central Military Forensic Medicine Laboratory of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs Major Goroshko) presented for the examination pistol "PB-9" # PO57C is in good technical repair and is suitable for shooting; the shots without pressure on the trigger are impossible; the shots from the pistol were made after the last cleaning before the examination.

The sentence of Minsk region court from March, 14 2000 on the criminal case charging Mr. Ignatovich, Mr. Malik, Mr. Guz and Mr. Saushkin, which convicted these people for kidnapping operator of the Russian Broadcasting Company "Russian Public Television" Mr. Zavadskij, as well as the case materials, which were separated from this criminal case, make clear that the Ignatovich gang and other not identified persons were armed, including the pistols for noiseless shooting with a muffler. When Mr. Ingnatovich attacked Ms. Tolstik and her lover Mr. Borisov (town Zhodino, Minsk region), Yasko (town Borisov), he was armed with a pistol with a muffler. The same pistol had Mr. Malik — a member of his gang. It is worth to point out that in the period of the charged crimes commitment Mr. Malik was a soldier of a special unit for anti-terror struggle "Diamond" ("Almaz") of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs; Mr. Ignatovich was a former soldier of the same unit; Convicted Guz was a Ministry of the Internal Affairs Academy student.

In the recorded cases, which were separated from this case there are evidences that Mr. Sivakov gave the pistol to Mr. Pavlichenko, who gave it to Mr. Malik, Mr. Ignatovich and other persons for using it while committing crimes. Nevertheless the question regarding participation of the Ignatovich gang members in the criminal actions of the so called "death squadrons", which were mentioned in the media, were not examined during the investigation process.

5. In the connection with the circumstances found out during the investigation of the criminal case # 414100 Mr. Pavlichenko was interrogated both as a witness and a suspected person, was arrested and put in the isolation ward of the State Security Committee (KGB) on the approvement of the General Prosecutor of the Republic of Belarus deputy based on the norms of the Presidential Decree from October, 21 1997 # 21 "On the urgent measures of the anti-terror and other grave violent crimes struggle" (see the inquiry of the representative of the Parliament Mr. Frolov from November, 18 2002, reference number 15/01 — 593-99-1). His interrogations were recorded with a video camera (Art. 192, 193, 219 of the Criminal Procedure Code). But within a day by the order of Mr. Sheiman Mr. Pavlichenko was released without giving any procedural document of the prosecutor or investigator to the isolation ward administration. It was not found out by the investigation whether Mr. Sheiman was acting on his own discretion or on someone's order, whether he exceeded his authority with these acts.

6. It draws attention that in the kidnapping Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij, as well as in the circumstances of Mr. Sojko murder, in the kidnapping and possible murder of Mr. Kotov, in the Nasibov family murder, in the kidnapping and violence to Mr. Grachev and Mr. Bykov were acting people in the special uniform of the police or special units. Salvation of the crimes, which cast aspersions on the representatives of public bodies, is of great importance. Absence of the investigation results prove either (1) that the officials of the law protecting bodies participate in those crimes and therefore they don't want to investigate the cases fully and impartially; or (2) that the people who work in the investigation departments are not qualified enough to solve such grave crimes.

7. The importance of the successful salvation of the crimes connected with the disappearances of Mr. Zaharenko, Mr. Gonchar, Mr. Krasovskij and others, and the intent attention of the public both in Belarus and abroad were not taken into account when charging the investigator of the Minsk prosecutor's department Chumachenko without any kind of operational support. The investigation group, which was created before and consisted of experienced Prosecutors' office of the Republic of Belarus, State Security Committee (KGB) and the Ministry of the Internal Affairs officials, who achieved considerable success in the investigation, was removed from the investigation of the case after resignation of the General Prosecutor Bozhelko and the Chairman of the State Security Committee (KGB) Matskevich.

8. When introducing the new chief of the State Security Committee (KGB) Mr. Jerin the President of the Republic of Belarus said that "coup d'etat was prevented in the country", but never mentioned any information regarding the names of the conspirators. In this and other speeches Mr. Lukashenko pointed out that Mr. Pavlichenko was illegally arrested and he would therefore introduce the journalists and the public evidence of his innocence. But this hasn't happened.

If the Prosecutors' office of the Republic of Belarus, State Security Committee (KGB) and the Ministry of the Internal Affairs officials were falsifying the evidence having the aim to discredit the highest officials of the state (Mr. Sheiman, Mr. Sivakov and others) by their participation in committing the grave crimes, and Mr. Pavlichenko was deliberately illegally arrested and held in custody, the guilty persons have to bear criminal responsibility for committing crimes against justice. No one from the investigation group members did face even a summary punishment. Mr. Bozhelko is in the presidential reserve; Mr. Matskevich is an ambassador in Yugoslavia. On the contrary, the victims of the regime became those who disclosed the results of the preliminary investigation on the disappearances to the public. Some of them had to leave secretly the country and seek political asylum (Mr. Alkajev, Mr. Petrushkevich, Mr. Sluchek, Mr. Ugljanitsa and others).

9. Mr. Chumachenko rejected numerous petitions, which were aimed to bring to life our procedural rights (including the criminal prosecution of the suspects), without any considerable grounds.

Admission of the victims’ representative Mr. Pogonajlo was illegally rejected, although he is authorized to represent our interests in the public bodies and courts of the Republic of Belarus.

Citizens Sheiman, Sivakov, Lapatik, Naumov, Pavlichenko, Leonov, Kez, Dik, Chvankin, Kolesnik, Koklin, Murashko, Mekijanets, Novatorskij and others were not fully interrogated regarding the information about the disappearances they possess. In some cases considerable contradictions in the witness testimonies were not eliminated. The investigation measures, aimed to establish the fact that some material evidence (the pistol "PB-9" # PO57C) and case records (including those regarding Mr. Pavlichenko) were lost, were not carried out.

When refusing to satisfy our petition to interrogate the above mentioned persons, Mr. Chumachenko in his decision from October, 3 2002 referred, that "the decision on the necessity to carry out certain investigation measures, their order and tactics, the decision to charge someone with a crime and other questions are determined by the investigator, who is in charge of the case". The decision further states that "according to point 6 Art. 34 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus the prosecutor is authorized to give written orders to lower prosecutor, investigator, the inquiry body and officials regarding carrying out investigation and other procedural and operational measures". Therefore, not denying the arguments regarding the validity of the petition requesting to carry out some investigation measures, the investigator points out that (1) he will decide to carry out those measures on his own, and on the contrary that (2) not the victims may suggest him in written form to carry out certain investigation measures — it is an exclusive right of the higher prosecutor. The prosecutor didn't give the investigator any written orders of the kind.

10. Having made the decision to suspend the investigation of the case the investigator has not carried out any of the investigation measures we asked for in our petitions. Thus, the investigator neglected his duties (which are written down in the law) to conduct full, comprehensive and impartial investigation of the criminal case circumstances and to fulfill the rule of law principle.

In the decision from January 10 2003 only evaluations and conclusions of the first investigation actions (examination of the crime place, questioning of the eyewitnesses, fixation of the found crime tracks, expert examination of some of the evidence) were stated. It contains the circumstances of the pistol "PB-9" taking out, salvation of some questions not directly connected with the salvation of the whole case. The content of the decision proves the inactivity of the investigator Chumachenko in the period of more than 3 years.

The attitude of the investigator to the case is reflected in his decisions, which reject the petitions of the victims. In the decision from January, 13 2003, which rejects the petition regarding the interrogation of the witness Lapatik, the investigator referred that "according to point 5 Art. 60 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus prosecutor, investigator, inquiry official, secretary of the court can not be interrogated as witnesses regarding the information about the circumstances of the crime they possess because of working on this case. When writing the report Mr. Lapatik was a chief of the criminal police department of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs, was directly involved in the carrying out of the investigation measures and actions the case # 414100. His report was written on the basis of this case. Therefore Mr. Lapatik cannot be interrogated regarding circumstances of the confidential information receiving ". In this case the investigator not only mispresented the sense of the law, but also demonstrated his obvious reluctance to investigate the case fully and impartially.

11. It is important to point out that Mr. Lapatik report is not a procedural, but an official document to the Minister of the Internal Affairs. Mr. Lapatik was not a member of the investigation group on the case # 414100 and cannot be a participant of the criminal procedure on this case.

Information and facts presented in his report had to be examined during the investigation and fixed as evidence as required by the criminal procedure law. As it is prescribed by Art. 101 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus "materials, which are gained during the operative actions may be used as a source of evidence if they are gained in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Belarus, presented, examined and evaluated in order, written down in the present Code". According to this norm on the resolution of the Minister of the Internal Affairs Naumov from November, 21 2000 this report was sent to the chief of the investigation group on the case #414100 Mr. Branchel for investigation. Nevertheless Mr. Lapatik was never interrogated as a witness on this case, although he possesses important information about the circumstances of the violent disappearance of our husbands. Establishment of the indicated in the report events authenticity is crucial for this criminal case.

Legally the report of Mr. Lapatik is a memorandum of the criminal police department of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs chief to the Minister of the Internal Affairs regarding the operational salvation of the violent disappearance of Mr. Zaharenko, Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij, which included names of the direct organizers and perpetrators of the crime (Mr. Sheiman, Mr. Sivakov, Mr. Pavlichenko and others), probable burial place of the disappeared.

Information which is laid down in the Lapatik report is approved and specified by the report of the investigator’s isolation ward #1 chief Alkajev, which contains information about giving out the pistol just before the disappearance of the politicians; by other materials, which became the ground for the arrest and detention of major Pavlichenko; by the petition of the General Prosecutor of the Republic of Belarus Bozhelko and Chairman of the State Security Committee (KGB) Matskevich to the President to arrest Secretary of the Security Council Sheiman and ex-Minister of the Internal Affairs Sivakov.

It is established that the General Prosecutor of the Republic of Belarus Bozhelko asked the General Prosecutor of the Russian Federation to provide him with special equipment to find the buried bodies. Therefore a special official letter regarding providing technical support was sent to Moscow. But on the prosecutors office of the Republic of Belarus initiative the letter was recalled, the equipment did not come to Belarus and the search operations were not held (inquiry of the representatives’ group "Respublika" ("Republic") of the Chamber of Representatives of the Parliament to the Chairman of the State Security Committee (KGB) Jerin — newspaper "Narodnaja Volja" ("People’s will"), # 31 (1594) from February, 18 2002).

Dismissed from their sits by the President Mr. Matskevich and Mr. Bozhelko, who possess important information about the circumstances of the investigated cases were not interrogated by the investigator.

In these circumstances, after the appointing of Mr. Sheiman, who as we think participated in committing the crime, the General Prosecutor the investigation was de facto suspended, many of the evidences were taken out from the case and destroyed.
Confirmation of the noted above is investigator’s Chumachenko answer to the petition of the victims regarding the check of the pistol “PB-9” # PO57C safety and restoration of the lost materials of the criminal case # 414100, including those regarding the arrest, interrogation and detention of Mr. Pavlichenko.

In the decision from November, 30 2002 to reject the petition he points out: "at present the investigation does not have any information, whether the pistol “PB-9” # PO57C in the isolation ward # 1. If Mrs. Krasovskaja knows anything specific about whether this pistol was destroyed, she should inform the investigation about the source of this information". And further: "at present the investigation does not possess any information, whether Mr. Pavlichenko has given any testimonies after his detention and in what capacity he was interrogated. If Mrs. Gonchar knows anything about this question, she should inform the investigation about the source of this information and about the content of this interrogation. In this case Mr. Pavlichenko will be interrogated once again taking into account the new data.

Meanwhile the Ministry of the Internal Affairs and of the State Security Committee (KGB) officials were obliged by the inquiry of the investigator to provide him with this information, and he should (taking into account established facts) carry out additional investigation measures, on which we insist. Higher prosecutor’s office, where we sent our petition on the acts of the investigator, agreed with his decision.

All the above mentioned information leads us to the conclusion that the investigation of the case is blocked by those who are in charge of it and those who are supervising the legality of its’ conduct. It is possible that some materials, which were found by the investigation and prove participation of the state highest officials in committing these crimes, are intentionally being hidden.

12. The report in the media cannot be the basis for bringing a criminal case to court, but if the investigation of the crime has already begun, all the circumstances mentioned in this report should be carefully examined and proved or disproved (part 2 Art. 88, 89, 96, 100 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus).
This norm is violated, because many publications, TV- and video-materials, which are part of the recorded case and are important to solve it if developing the version of participation of the special units in disappearances of Mr. Zaharenko, Mr. Gonchar, Mr. Krasovskij and Mr. Zavadskij, were not investigated and are not even mentioned in the decision to suspend the investigation.

According to part 5 Art. 246 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus "before suspending the investigation investigator, inquiry official are obliged to carry out all investigation measures, which are possible to carry out without a charged person, take all measures to find this person, to identify the crime or to find the disappeared person". This norm of the law is not fulfilled and therefore the decision is subject to repeal.

When renewing the investigation it is necessary to carry out the following investigation measures:

1) To take out from Minsk region court archives the recorded criminal case # 414100 charging Mr. Ignatovich, Mr. Malik, Mr. Guz, Mr. Saushkin, and the criminal cases separated from this case, and attach materials of these cases regarding participation in the disappearances of certain state officials, who were mentioned in the published by the independent media documents from the case # 414100 (particularly the reports of Mr. Lapatik and Mr. Alkajev), to check and evaluate these materials;

2) To prove or disprove the information, provided by a member of the Special Unit of Quick Reaction (unit #3214) and published in the article by the reporter Marina Koktysh "When these people were shot they were killed "In the name of the President.."” in the newspaper "Narodnaja Volja" ("People’s Will"), #154 from August, 22 2001, it is necessary to identify and interrogate the persons, named in the publication. In this article the anonymous (not identified by the investigator) named specific facts about the circumstances of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovskij violent kidnapping by the soldiers of the special military unit # 3214 using "BMW" and "Audi", which were the property of the Special Unit of Quick Reaction. Among the participants he mentioned not only major Pavlichenko, but also soldiers Koklin, Balynin, Murashko, Budko, Novatorskij, Mekijanets and others, whose names he does not remember, but could identify. "One of them is often shown on TV in an advertising about special units – he is standing near the banner of the unit" (the information is confirmed by the witness Metelskij);

3) To interrogate former chief of the Criminal police Lapatik, Minister of the Internal Affairs Naumov, ex-Minister of the Internal Affairs Sivakov, ex-Secretary of the Security Council Sheiman, major Pavlichenko, Mr. Vasilchenko to find out the facts and events they know about the disappearances of the persons, which are being investigated; to pass a decision to dismiss them from their positions for the period of the investigation;

4) To check legality and validity of the arrest and subsequent release from the isolation ward of Mr. Pavlichenko, who is suspected in committing violent kidnapping and possible physical elimination of the disappeared;

5) To interrogate former General Prosecutor Bozhelko, ex-Secretary of the Security Council Matskevich, who possesses information, which was the basis for the detention and interrogation of Mr. Pavlichenko;

6) To interrogate officers and soldiers of the special units of the Presidential Security Service, Security Council and Ministry of the Internal Affairs, who might be participants and witnesses of the criminal events;

7) To take out from the isolation ward # 1 the pistol "PB-9" # PO56C, which according to the report of Mr. Alkajev and Mr. Lapatik was used when committing mentioned crimes, and fix it as a material evidence;

8) When investigating circumstances of the illegal taking out of the pistol "PB-9" # PO57C from the isolation ward # 1:

— read through the secret official instructions, which lays down the order of carrying out death sentences by shooting, attach to the recorded case necessary writings out of it;
— find and attach to the recorded case letter of the Minister of the Internal Affairs deputy Chvankin with the resolution of the Punishments Carrying out Committee chief Kadushkin, which contains a request to give out the pistol “probably for carrying out practice shooting” (as Mr. Alkajev testifies while interrogation on November, 24 2000); report of Mr. Dik to Mr. Chvankin with the request to give out the pistol (record of the interrogation of Mr. Chvankin);
— taking into account established circumstances interrogate once again all the persons who are indicated in our petitions connected with the taking out of the pistol, its’ use before giving back to the isolation ward # 1;
— restore the lost materials of the criminal case # 414100, including the records of Mr. Pavlichenko interrogations regarding his detention, custody and their grounds;
— take out from the isolation ward the documents, which prove that he was held there in custody;
— interrogate officials of the State Security Committee isolation ward and the State Security Committee chief officials regarding who and on the basis of what document (or oral order) took Mr. Pavlichenko into custody and released him from the isolation ward; give legal evaluation of the gained information;
— with witnesses and in the isolation ward # 1 carry out taking out of the pistol "PB-9" # PO57C and attach it to the case materials as a material evidence;
— establish whether such pistols were part of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs armament, particularly in the Special Unit of Quick Reaction , were major Pavlichenko was serving, or they were stored in a special depot;
— find out whether this and other armament was shot off in order to increase shell database to identify arms;
— find out whether there is any information in the shell database regarding the pistol "PB-9"” # PO57C, if no – why;

9) To check the information, which is available to the investigation and is pointing to the political motivation of the committed crime;

10) Carry out other investigation measures, which will help to solve this criminal case, to find guilty persons and bring them to justice;

Based on the written above and Art. 50, 138-140, 142, part 2 Art. 249 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus, we

Request

1) To overrule the decision of the investigator Chumachenko from January, 20 2003 regarding suspension of the investigation of the case # 110351;
2) To restore the investigation of this case and give written orders to the investigators to carry out the investigation measures, which we insist on;
3) To dismiss from the investigation of this case the investigator Chumachenko;
4) To ask the Prosecutors’ Office of the Republic of Belarus to create an investigation group, which would consist of highly qualified specialists from the Prosecutors’ Office, State Security Committee and Ministry of the Internal Affairs;
5) Taking into account the gravity and circumstances of the committed crime and the fact that the prosecutors office, which charged this case and carried out the investigation is headed by a person, who is suspected by us, give this criminal case to the investigators of the State Security Committee of the Republic of Belarus.

Victims: Mrs. Gonchar
Mrs. Krasovskaja