Yaroslav Zhdamarov

A dog handler and sapper, he served in Azov from 2015 to 2019. He was sentenced to 22 years in prison.

Originally, the case had 24 defendants. All of them had served in Azov at different times and in different positions. Many had never held a weapon or had left the army long before the full-scale war began. All are accused of violent seizure of power (Part 4 of Article 35, Article 278 of the Criminal Code) and organizing the activities of a terrorist organization (Part 1 of Article 205.5 of the Criminal Code). Some of the defendants are additionally charged with undergoing training for terrorist activity (Article 205.3 of the Criminal Code). The prosecution requested sentences ranging from 16 to 24 years in prison, and for all the men—in high-security colonies. Two Ukrainian servicemen—Davyd Kasatkin and Dmytro Labynsky—were exchanged before the trial began; Oleksandr Ishchenko died in pre-trial detention. In September, nine Ukrainian women who had served in Azov, eight cooks, and a supply clerk returned home as part of a prisoner exchange. Those defendants who were included in the exchange continue to be tried in absentia in Russia.

2020s

Cases of justifying terrorism Cases of terrorism

Reading time: 2 minutes.

The final statement

‘…When I told the refugee camp staff about my past service, I hoped to find at least common sense, at most justice. But now I am afraid. I am afraid, gentlemen. But not before justice. I am afraid that here, in this courtroom, I may find neither.’

To avoid problems with the law, you don’t have to break it. This is simple, understandable logic that everyone follows. I followed it too. But this trial proves the opposite. Without breaking any laws of the Russian Federation, I found myself in the dock.

To understand this, put yourself in my shoes.

Like you, I lived in my hometown. Like you, I served the state. Like you, I was a law-abiding citizen. It so happened that my hometown, or yours, was occupied. I or you were taken prisoner, and six months to a year later, a law was written that retroactively defined my or your former service before dismissal as a crime against humanity.

How would you feel in my place? How can you obey a law that has not yet been written? What else can I say? For my part, I did everything possible.

First, I did not do anything criminal. Neither during my service nor after. Including the particularly favorable period for this in February 2022. The very fact of my service, my former service, is not a crime.

And to be sure of this, it is enough to look at the laws, the Constitution, and the list of terrorist organizations of the Russian Federation in force during my service.

I resigned from service long before it was retroactively branded as criminal. This, in turn, means that my service was not criminal in essence, in intent, or under the laws of the Russian Federation.

And in the end, I reported my former service, despite the danger and risk. What would you have done in my place? How should any law-abiding citizen have acted? There is no other way but to act according to the law.

Just as I did when I told the refugee camp staff about my past service, I hoped to find at least common sense, at most justice.

But now I am afraid. I am afraid, gentlemen. But not before justice. I am afraid that here, in this courtroom, I may find neither.

Southern District Military Court, Rostov-on-Don, Russia

5 March 2025

Source: Mediazona

More information about the case: Memorial

Photo: Alexandra Astakhova / Mediazona