At the preliminary hearing on 15 October attorneys for Anna Politkovskaya’s family and for the four accused expected Judge Zubov to announce that the trial would be held in camera.

Formal grounds for such a decision were that several of the volumes of case materials contain documents marked “secret”. For the most part this is correspondence between the Investigative Committee at the Prosecutor General's office, the Federal Security Service and the Moscow City police department. The State prosecutors intended to demand that the entire trial be held behind closed doors though under Russian law it is possible to close only those hearings at which secret documents are being examined. Judge Zubov was inclined to hear the trial in camera, it seemed, but no decision was taken that day.

WEEK ONE

Monday, 17 November

11.00 am 30-40 TV cameras and about a hundred journalists from all over the world gathered outside the Moscow District Military Court on Arbat Street in central Moscow. The guards had orders not to let anyone into the building. Only after a row was Dmitry Muratov, editor in chief of Novaya gazeta, allowed in.

11.15 am The staff of the Military Court apparently knew that the trial would be held behind closed doors. The court secretary Olga naively admitted as much. Russia’s human rights ombudsman Vladimir Lukin was also stopped at the entrance to the building. He was allowed in after showing his ID and making a phone call, in all probability, to Vyacheslav Lebedev, chairman of the Supreme Court.

Lukin explained to the court staff that the hearing could not be closed to the public since Judge Zubov had not yet issued such a ruling. Consequently, all who wished could attend the proceedings.

11.30 am After Lukin’s intervention journalists were permitted to enter the building. The courtroom, however, could not accommodate everyone.

11.45 am Court officials told those present that the hearing would be transferred to courtroom No 3 but it proved little larger and, at most, could hold 10-15 persons who were not taking part in the trial.

12.30 pm The hearing began. Judge Zubov turned down a request by Murad Musayev, the accused Djabrail Makhmudov’s lawyer, to hear the case every other week because Musayev was involved in another trial.

The judge also rejected a petition by the State prosecutor for the proceedings to be held in camera. He did qualify his decision by saying that if he received a single complaint from the jurors of pressure from any quarter he would hold the trial behind closed doors. Judge Zubov was particularly concerned that limited space meant some jurors had to sit next to representatives of the press.

Tuesday, 18 November

Selection of the jury

None of the 12 members of the jury (or the 8 reserve jurors) indicated that they were worried about taking part in an open trial and all took the oath without reservation.

Wednesday, 19 November

11.30 am The hearing was delayed. No reasons were given. Journalists were provided with detailed instructions about covering a trial by jury. The jurors should not be filmed or photographed. Three chairs were set next to the benches where the jury sat, solving the problem of accommodating all the jurors.

According to reserve juror Yevgeny Kolesov the jury spent the day in their room, talking about different subjects. Among other things, they noted and discussed how many journalists had come to cover the trial. Several times Yevgenia, the court official responsible for looking after the jury, entered the room and drew the attention of jurors to the large number of TV cameras outside. She wanted to be sure they were not afraid, she said. The jury decided that they would see how the trial progressed with such a media presence and only then decide if the TV cameras were proving a hindrance. (At that moment they did not know it was prohibited to film or photograph the jurors.) Later Yevgenia again entered the room with a draft document stating that the jurors did not want to work in the presence of the media. The jury members did not sign the document and left it on the table.

Meanwhile Judge Zubov announced to those gathered in the courtroom that the jurors were apprehensive of working with the media present. The rights of the jurors had been forgotten, he complained, when it was decided to hold an open trial and he declared that the proceedings would henceforth be held in camera. The journalists and the relatives of the accused were escorted from the courtroom. The judge refused to read out the document “written by the jurors”, as required by law, informing the defence attorneys that he would do so sometime later. The jurors entered the courtroom and the examination of the case began.

Thursday, 20 November

11.30 am The hearing was again delayed. No explanation was given but it was said there were problems bringing one of the accused from the pre-trial detention centre. According to Yevgeny Kolesov, he and his fellow jurors waited in their room and discussed the request for the case to be heard in camera which, supposedly, had come from the jurors themselves. All were indignant. 19 of the 20 jurors signed a statement that they did not object to the press being in court and it was handed to Judge Zubov by the foreman of the jury.

1.00 pm A lunch break was called.

2.00 pm The hearing began but the jury was not present. Judge Zubov announced that he was deferring further examination of the case until Monday, 1 December. This was, he said, at the request of defence attorney Musayev. Musayev objected. He had settled his difficulties and now would not be taking part in another trial. Zubov insisted. Pressed by for the reasons behind this decision by the attorneys for the Politkovskaya family, Zubov did not reply and brushed aside a suggestion by all the attorneys to prolong the hearing for another 2-3 hours. Judge Zubov did not read out the statement by the members of the jury.

3.07 pm Juror Yevgeny Kolesov spoke live about the proceedings on radio station Echo Moskvy.

Friday, 21 November

Judge Zubov’s secretary rang all those taking part in the trial and invited them, without being more specific, to come to court on 25 November “to resolve procedural issues”. The official representative of the Supreme Court Pavel Odintsov told Novaya gazeta that the Supreme Court would be studying the situation and verifying information made public by the media.