THE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS

Friday, August 10, 1919 17

Senators Seek Release of Anatoly Shcharansky

WASHINGTON (JTA) —
Sens. John Heinz (R-Pa.)
and Alan Cranston (D-
Calif.) said that they have
sent a joint letter co-signed
by 42 other Senators to
Soviet President Leonid
Brezhnev asking that
Anatoly Shcharansky be
allowed to leave the Soviet
Union and join his wife, Av-
ital, in Israel.
The letter to Brezhnev
appealed to him "in the
name of humanity and good
ill between our two
,ons" to release
Shcharansky and allow him
to join his wife in Israel.
The Senators noted that
in a recent letter to his
mother, Ida Milgrom,
Shcharansky indicated that
he is under severe physical
and mental stress.
Mrs. Milgrom was
scheduled to see- her son
this week.
In a related development,
an analysis of the arrest,
trial and appeal process in
the Shcharansky case has
lead an American expert on
Soviet law to conclude that
grave procedural errors
have been committed, war-
ranting a reversal of the
conviction.
This conclusion by
George Fletcher, professor
of law at the University of
California, Los Angeles, fol-
lows a recent 10-day study
of the case in Moscow, dur-
ing which time he inter-
viewed the Shcharansky
family, their legal adviser
and, among others, the chief
justice of the Russian Sup-
reme Court.
Fletcher is a member of
the steering committee of
the National Lawyers
Committee of the National
Conference on Soviet Jewry
(NCSJ).
Although Fletcher said
he believes Shcharansky is,
in fact, innocent "under the
vague Soviet definition of
treason" he limited his re-
view of the case to pro-
cedural improprieties. His
findings, in the form of a
paper, were released by the
NCSJ.
"The procedural issue
that haunts the
Shcharansky case is the
violation of the defen-
dant's statutory right to
the assistance of coun-
sel," charges Fletcher.
"Why did Shcharansky
end up defending himself?
Did the court properly con-
- ider petitions to appoint
;fense counsel? Should the
court have permitted the de-
fendant in a capital case to
stand alone, without legal
assistance?"
Shcharansky was kept in
isolation from the day of his
arrest on March 15, 1977,
until July 10, 1978 — six
days before his trial began.
"There was no way of his
knowing anything that
happened in the outside
world (during this period),"
says Fletcher.
"The defendant labored
under such impediments
that he could not carry on an
effective defense on his own
behalf. The striking fact of
Shcharansky's situation on
July 10, 1978, is that he did

Leonid Slepak, right, son of jailed Soviet Jewish
dissident Vladimir Slepak, meets with Congressman
William Brodhead (D-17th District), who has been
working on the senior Slepak's case and has made
special appeals to Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev and
U.S. Secretary of State Cyrus Vance on his behalf. The
younger Slepak has received permission to emigrate
to Israel and is seeking the same for his father.

not know of the world-wide
protest mounted on his be-
half. Shcharansky began
his own defense without
even knowing that
President Carter had pub-
licly exonerated him of col-
laboration with the CIA."
Shcharansky was con-
victed of treason and dis-
seminating anti-Soviet
opinions and sentenced
to 13 years deprivation of
freedom — the first three
in prison and the last 10
in a labor camp.
Although the Soviet press
prejudged him guilty of spy-
ing for the CIA, only
Shcharansky himself and
some Soviet legal officials
know how much of the 50
volumes of documentary
evidence and five days of
oral testimony given during
the trial were actually in-
corporated into his 50-page
judgment.
To this day the courts con-
tinue to refuse to give a copy
of the judgment to
Shcharansky's family or
legal adviser, maintaining
that Soviet law only . re-
quires them to supply
judgment to the convicted
person.
Shcharansky is now, as
before, in solitary confine-
ment, unable to consult
with an attorney and in-
capable of preparing an ap-
peal on his own.
According to Fletcher's
interview with A.K. Or-
lov, chief justice of the
RSFSR (Russian) Sup-
reme Court, it is unlikely
that the contents of the
judgment, which in-
cludes an explanation of
the verdict and the evi-
dence it is based upon,
will ever be made public.
Although one of the basic
rights of any convicted
Soviet defendant is to ap-
peal within seven days for a
review of the legality of the
conviction, Shcharansky is
prevented from making this
"cassational appeal." Be-
cause one of the three judges
who heard his case is a
member of the Russian Sup-
reme Court, the judgment
in his case is considered to
have come from the Sup-
reme Court itself.
The only mode of review
now available to
Shcharansky is a "protest"

proceeding initiated by
either Roman Rudenko, the
procurator general of the
USSR; L.N. Smirnov, the
chief justice of the USSR
Supreme Court; or Chief
Justice Orlov. But, accord-
ing to Fletcher, there is lit-
tle chance that Shcharans-
ky's case will be reviewed in
this manner.
"In the same interview
. . . Chief Justice Orlov said
plainly that the Court
would not reconsider or re-
view its decision. The Sup-
reme Court was satisfied
that the conviction was le-
gally sound. In view of this
pre judgment of the issues,
the chief justice was obvi-
ously not interested in any
pleas from Anatoly
Shcharansky himself."
According to Leonid
Shcharansky, parts of his
brother's trial were con-
ducted in closed, secret
sessions because they al-
legedly dealt with state
secrets or politically sen-
sitive matters.
It was during one of these
sessions that Sohya
Lipovsky, a KGB agent, tes-
tified against Shcharansky.
Although it is unknown
how much weight her tes-
timony carried (because the
judgment is unavailable), it
is known that Shcharansky
was prevented, during his
closing argument, from re-
butting this or any other
testimony given in closed
session.
This, says Fletcher, is
"the most blatant restric-
tion on Shcharansky's car-
rying on his own defense
. . . . A month before the be-
ginning of the trial . . . the
Supreme Court of the USSR
issued a decree instructing
all courts to implement and
protect the constitutional
right to a defense. Point 17
of this decree says explicitly
that 'the court may not re-
strict the exposition of
arguments bearing on the
substance of the case.' If the
court does so restrict the
closing argument of the de-
fense, the decree continues,
the violation constitutes a
per se ground for reversal."
"There is no doubt," con-
cludes Fletcher, "that the
court violated this provision
in Shcharansky's case by
not permitting him to refer

to Lipovsky's testimony in
his closing argument. If the
matter was politically sen-
sitive, the court could
readily have solved that
problem by calling another
closed session for final
argument. There was no ex-
cuse for denying
Shcharansky's right to
make a closing argument
encompassing all the issues
in the case."
Meanwhile, Soviet
Prisoner of Conscience
Boris Tsitlionok was re-
leased from exile after
spending nearly 41/2 years
in Siberia.
Tsitlionok, 35, became
the third Soviet Jewish ac-
tivist to be released in a lit-
tle more than a month. As in
the case of Mark Nashpitz,
Tsitlionok's sentence was
reduced a few months to
compensate for the time he
spent in jail and in transit to
his place of exile on the
Yenisey River.
In Washington, the Fast
of Tisha b'Av and a com-
memoration of the 27th an-
niversary of the "Night of
the Murdered Poets" — the
"liquidation" of Soviet
Jewish poets, writers and
intellectuals at Stalin's or-
ders in Moscow on Aug. 12,
1952 — were marked at
services outside the Soviet
Embassy recently.
The services were spon-
sored by the Soviet Jewry
Committee of the Jewish
Community Council of
Greater Washington.
It also was reported
that the chairman of the
NCSJ called upon Soviet
officials to release all
Jewish prisoners of con-
science in commemora-
tion of the forthcoming
27th anniversary of what
has become known as the
"Night of the Murdered
Poets."
It also was learned that in
commemoration of the 27th

anniversary of the murder Murdered Poets," contain-
of 24 Jewish writers and ing the works of five of the
poets in Moscow's Lubianka writers, is available from
Prison, composer and the NCSJ, Suite 907, 10 E.
pianist Morris Moshe Cotel 40th St., New York, N.Y.,
has released a recording of 10016.
his musical tribute, "Aug.
12, 1952: The Night of the
Murdered Poets." The 15-
minute composition in-
cludes five instrumental
parts and features Eli Wal-
lach reading excerpts from
the works of five of the slain
writers.

The record is available
from the NCSJ or Gre-
nadilla Records, 345 Park
Ave. S., New York, N.Y.,
10010. There is a charge.
The pamphlet, "Night of the

c3vA).
■ _v_
THE I \-\. GOOD
NND
P,NO \I \I \N \NW_
\
644,
DO 00 '00 G000

51-6

ARE YOU PAYING TOO MUCH

For

Homeowners or Auto Insurance

CALL US FOR A FREE QUOTE Maybe we can help
Ask about discount on
Homeowners Policies for
NON SMOKERS

HAROLD HANDLER AGENCY
559-5575

"meme ■ iu ■ sy

B UC KL ES U N LIMITED

FREE BUCKLE!

WITH EACH PURCHASE OF $30 OR MORE

HAND CRAFTED TOOLED
LEATHER BELTS $8 a $10

PEARL SCISSORS

BUCKLES $ 4 EACH

3 FOR $11

"THE BUCKLE LADY"

OTHER BUCKLES AT $5, $6, $8, $10 and up

OVER "1,200" DIFFERENT STYLES
LARGEST BUCKLE DISPLAY IN MICHIGAN

2240 COOLIDGE

5 BLKS. N. OF 11-MILE

BERKLEY. MI 48072

Monday thru Saturday 10-6—Free Parking

S45-6885

We Take The Worry Out Of

DRAPERY CLEANING

Drapery cleaning when properly done is an art, we at CUSTOM
DRAPERY CLEANERS practice most diligently, in our never
ending quest to improve our service to you by seeking better
systems and methods.
Don't take good drapery cleaning for granted. We at CUSTOM
DRAPERY CLEANERS make good cleaning happen.

• DRAPERIES • BEDSPREADS • LAMPSHADES

(Cleaned, Recovered
or Relined)

(Cleaned or Laundered)

WINDOW SHADES

BLANKETS

(Cleaned & Reversed)

(Professionally Laundered)

PILLOWS, new ticking & feathers or down added

CUSTOM DRAPERY CLEANERS 891-1818

Suburban call collect

Learn to remember phone numbers, practice on

MINEME
VISA'

EIGHT NINE ONE EIGHTEEN EIGHTEEN

"T 1 '"..c2r.ge