O.Altangerel: The court is allowing a ball into an unguarded goal Interview with the lawyer O.Altangerel.

-You have heard and experienced dark and bright things since you became a lawyer for the Major General Ch.Amarbold. How long have you worked as a lawyer? -I have worked as a lawyer since I graduated from the School of Law of National University of Mongolia. -What kind of cases did you defend before? Why did General Ch.Amarbold choose you as his lawyer? -Ch.Amarbolds son and were classmates in university. Major General new me as a friend of his son. He also knew that I was providing legal assistance for the victims of the first ever incident of human trafficking and saving and credit cooperatives. He asked me to work as his lawyer and I accepted. I have worked as his lawyer for four years. -You are the third lawyer to be detained for performing their duties, right? -There have been incidents where lawyers have been detained for legal conflicts but there are very few occurrences of lawyers being arrested for defending their clients. An example of this are the controversial doctors incident, where the lawyer J.Yarinshil was arrested for saying that his client was innocent and for arguing with the prosecutor. And during the trial of Damiran who was a suspect of the murder of S.Zorig, his lawyer L.Sanjaasuren was arrested for giving legal assistance to his client and alleged revealing of state secrets. I know his son well; he and his father are honest and fight for justice. I admired the courage of L.Sanjaasuren when I learnt of the circumstance he was working in. -I personally didnt think the reason for you arrest was sufficient. You talked about being under a lot of pressure. Have you had any pressure and oppression during your detainment? -I am absolutely certain that I did not break any law. I didnt have any pressure during my detainment. I have to say that the condition of detainment needs to be improved, it was extremely difficult. The detention center was designed to detain 190 people but there are over 400 detainees. According to the policy they serve meals for 190 people to 400 people and 20 to 30 people are cramped into a tiny room. The guards and police work in a very difficult environment because there are just too many detainees for them to handle. I wondered how they managed the place. The State Specialized Inspection Agency decreed that the condition was unsatisfactory for detainment two years ago, but it is still in use. The walls are breaking down; a small earthquake will bring the whole place down. -It seems the case will be quite until the police officers find a lawyer. Did you meet with the police officers after your release? -We have met couple of times after my release. I am helping him choose a lawyer in accordance with the advice of the Mongolian Lawyers Union. The Sukhbaatar District Court did not prohibit this. They have chosen three lawyers by their case experience, education and skill.

-The court seems to want to deal with the issue fast and the prosecuted seems to want to drag it. What do you think about this? -The prosecuted and the prosecutors must act according to the law. Lets look at what happened; the last time the Mongolian Lawyers Union appointed lawyers, the court demanded they learn 29 case files in two days. This was not suspended even thought the Constitutional Court of Mongolia agreed to it. If they waiting for Constitutional Courts decision instead of rushing there wouldnt be so many problems. The Constitutional Court will meet and make its decision on the 9th of this month; the Sukhbaatar District Court could have set the date of the trial after. The case is lengthening because the Judge is not providing rightful legal environment. There is a tendency of lengthening of the whole procedures because of all the different levels of court. Mongols know well of the trial of Zavkhans Ch.Erdene-Ochirs, where he was detained for six year and the court found him innocent. Light crime committers are usually sentenced for 3-6 years, but this man was imprisoned for many years though he was innocent. Our courts have these kinds of problems. -You remind the judge that he is violating laws. The judges and lawyers are equally educated about laws and rights but one criminal law has been explained in so many ways that it is difficult for us to tell who is telling the truth anymore. -It is directly related to the fact that the Mongolian laws we currently implement is so ambiguous. An example is when there are disagreements in the Constitutional Court the case is suspended but after this on the trials there is also decrees for suspension. There are many issues such as this. I cant deny that this case has presented many issues and conflicts that cause dispute between the judges and lawyers. The department of law has its own language, so defined laws cant be explained in multiple ways. I was certain that my actions were all congruent to the law but we have all seen what happened in the procedure. I have met and consulted with many lawyers and legal experts and introduced how I was conducting legal procedure. None of them gave me a negative response but it all changed in the court process. -It was clear from the court procedures that the interaction between the lawyers and the judges were conflicted. Doesnt the participants of the trial have equal rights? Requests and statements made by the lawyers were denied automatically. Does this have something to do with your skills as a lawyer? -I cant deny that it might have something to do with the skill and knowledge of the lawyers. Judges must treat the prosecutors and the lawyers equally but we can all see that this was not the case. An example is when I ask a question the judge would reply the prosecutor just explained and not answer my question. When we were detained the judges statement stated detained on the base of the statement of the prosecutor. According to the criminal investigation punishment law it is inappropriate for the judge to side with one of the subjects of the court. This is like when the prosecutor is an offense of and the lawyer is a goalie of a football match and the referee coming up to the goalie and telling him not to block the ball from entering the goal.

- There are many who state that the court procedure that is being carried since March has shown clear signs that the judges support one side over the other. Who has the authority to judge the judges when they make legal violations? -The higher courts are in charge of monitoring the court procedures. Whatever the court decides, it is clear that there will be an appeal. The decision is for the prosecutors, the prosecuted will appeal again and if its for the prosecuted the prosecutors will appeal. The preliminary trial hasnt even taken place but the City Court of Ulaanbaatar and General Court has already expressed their positions. The Head of the Court Council is the Head of the Supreme Court. Looking at this, it is clear how it will turn out. The prosecutors and lawyers have started meeting, the court date will be set soon. I hope they learn from their previous mistakes and avoid such issues and that they remember to be fair and just to the court candidates. -Your statement will run through the Constitutional Court soon, do you think that if they approve of you statement it would have an effect on the court procedure? -I made a statement according to the Criminal Law 294s section 1 and 2 that the Constitutional Law 14 is being violated. If the Constitutional Court approve, the circumstances will change. -Things would have been different if you defended him in court after being with him throughout the investigation and questionings and giving advice for four years. Do you think you will continue to work for Ch.Amarbold as his lawyer in the future? -I have not talked about working for Ch.Amarbold as his lawyer in this case with him. I have transferred all the documents to his chosen lawyer. If necessary I am ready to work with him.