Аъзам ФАРМОНОВ, ENGLISH

COMPLAINT LETTER

Talib Yakubov

A`zam Formonov

To the Chairman of the Supreme Court Republic of Uzbekistan

Mr. Boritosh Mustafayev

From Talib Yakubov- defense counsel of convicted- Azam Turgunovich Farmonov,

Who are imprisoned in Penal Colony UY 64/71

————-———————–

16, rue Marcel Pajotin, Angers, 49000, France

COMPLAINT LETTER

(Under the control order)

Dear Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan!

By expressing my respect to you, I am sending to you for your attention and consideration my complaint letter under the control procedure concerning criminal case №1-110/2006 instituted against Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov on April 29, 2006 by K. A. Mallaev – counselor of Justice, senior investigator on special cases of the division of investigation of Jizzakh regional prosecutor department.

From the beginning of this letter, I would like to notice that, until present time I am the defense counsel concerning criminal case №1-110/2006 which instituted against Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov. To substantiate this claim is very simple.

The judgment of Yangiyer district criminal court on 07, June 2006 (conducted under the chairmanship of the criminal court E.M. Khidirbaev.) will prove my attendance as defense counsel in the court concerning this criminal case. (Attached to this complaint letter and I will mark it as N1-T.Yo.) However, judge E.M. Khidirbaev by his other judgment on 15 June 2006 (I will mark it as N2) completely illegally removed me from the right of participation in the court as a defense counsel in criminal case №1-110/2006 instituted against Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov.

From the attached to this complaint letter N2 it is clear that eliminate me from the right to be a defense counsel in trial was proposed by Sh. Norbutayev- is the senior assistant of Yangiyer city prosecutor. In part 1 of the Article 52 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan mentioned that “A suspect or defendant may waive a defense counsel at any moment of proceedings in the criminal case. Such waiver shall be permitted only upon the initiative of the suspect, defendant or accused…”

Judge E. M. Khidirbaev while made judgment N2 based on Articles 80 and 423 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan. He wrote as: «As described above, and in accordance with Article 80 and by applying the Article 423 of Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan court make judgment». Do these articles have any connection with the issue of the refusal of legal defends counsel from the trial? There is no any relation at all. Article 80 deal with the filing of and Deciding on Challenge and Self-Disqualification and, Article 423 is disclosing a procedure for Rendering Findings in Court Session.

From above arguments it became clear that 1) senior assistant of Yangiyer district prosecutor Sh. Norbutayev had no any rights to introduce a proposal about elimination me from defense counsel activity in the court; 2) Judge E. M. Khidirbaev in the process of judgment No. 2 (A) He either did not respect the procedural laws; or (B): tried to use cunning; or (C): he was under pressure from the prosecutor’s office – no other words can explain his activity related to absurd judgment N2.

Thus, I consider myself at present as defense counsel concerning to criminal case №1-110/2006 instituted against Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov.

Comment1. Figurant in above mentioned criminal case Alisher Karamatov released from prison on March 12, 2012, and therefore in further the main task will be about Azam Farmonov. With regard to Alisher Karamatov where there is a need, we would use his initials.

Now, let’s deal with the Main ISSUE

In criminal case №1-110/2006

1) First of all, I assert that Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov completely innocent and I confirm that this criminal case was opened unlawfully with slandering and with evil goals;

2) Operative event for the detention of Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov was not carried out by the Jizzakh regional prosecutor’s office and police officers on April 29, 2006, in the morning at around 7-30, in the area in front of the hospital, in the bus stop which located in the Tashkent street in the route of Guliston-Tashkent of a large Uzbek highway;

3) It was not the fact of receiving money from “victim” Uktam Mamatkulov by “blackmailers” Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov on April 29, 2006, in the morning at around 7-30, in the area in front of the hospital, in the bus stop which located in the Tashkent street in the route of Guliston-Tashkent of a large Uzbek highway;

4) The operation for the detention of Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov conducted at different points of the city by the Gulistan city police officers on April 29, 2006, in the morning at around 7-00 and 7-30;

5) Only after detention of Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov, they have started preparing documents for opening the criminal case: (1) on the issuance of money by Uktam Mamatkulov to Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov; (2) Has started activities on a fictional version of detention Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov.

Thus, the accusation of the Jizzakh regional prosecutor’s office and of the Sirdarya regional Department of the Internal affairs and collected investigation materials on the №1-110/2006 criminal case and the verdict of Yangiyer district criminal court regarding №1-110/2006 criminal case are absolutely illegal, unsubstantiated and consist from direct slander. Therefore,

(i) figurant of №1-110/2006 criminal case Azam Farmonov should be released from prison immediately without any exception;

(ii) In accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 83 of Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan figurants of №1-110/2006 criminal case Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov immediately completely should be justified, must be rehabilitated.

In order to understand this is it not necessary to have juridical knowledge.

Three documents will be enough to prove my above-mentioned 1-5 claims:

The decision made by K. A. Mallaev – counselor of Justice, senior investigator on special cases of the division of investigation of Jizzakh regional prosecutor department on 29 April 2006 concerning of criminal proceedings, on the criminal case and conduct of interrogators work;

The decision on 16 May, 2006 made by Colonel B. Kadirov – the senior investigator of the Investigation division of the Sirdarya region department of interior affairs concerning of attraction as a defendant in a criminal case;

► Verdict of the Yangiyer city criminal court on 15 June 2006.

Evidence:

Both investigator and judge argues that Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov were arrested by Jizzakh regional prosecutor’s office and by the police during their receiving money through blackmail from “victim” Uktam Mamatkulov on 29 April 2006 about 730 in the morning.

Excerpt from K. Mallaev decision:

On 29 April, 2006 Azam Farmonov and his criminal partner Alisher Karamatov as the group were detained and exposed their crime by the participants during the event when they were receiving money 200,000 Uzbek currency sum and 250 US dollar through blackmail in Gulistan city of the Sirdarya region from Uktam Mamatkulov with the condition that, they will not publish on the Internet the written claims of heads of Farmer units about Mamatkulov’s actions.

Excerpt from B. Kadirov decision:

On April 29, 2006 at approximately 7.30 in the morning in the bus stop which is located in front of the region hospital, in the Tashkent street of the Gulistan city, in the route of Gulistan-Tashkent of a large Uzbek highway were detained Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov through operative actions by the Jizzakh Regional Department of the internal affairs police and by the prosecutor’s office employees during theirs receiving money 200,000 Uzbek currency sum and 250 US dollar through blackmail from Uktam Mamatkulov.

Comment2. From excerpt B Kadirov’s decision, there are shown three objects: 1) the Tashkent Street in Gulistan City which is located in the route Guliston-Tashkent of the Large Uzbek highway; 2) Region Hospital; 3) Task went about the bus stop. There is double-sided railway between large Uzbek highway and the region hospital. The distance between Railroad bed and Uzbek highway is about 4-5 meters. Referred in the decision bus stop are outwardly open, three sides and roof consists of concrete blocks and in the form of a line. It has built as «back away», from the railroad, measurements approximately – length 6 meters, the width of 3 meters and a height of 2.5 meters. Regional Hospital is located far from railroad bed at least 100 meters. If from railroad bed go down towards to the regional hospital there is another bus stop approximately 20-25 meters from the railroad bed. In the bus stop in front of the route every big and small buses, minibusses and taxes incoming from the west of the country will stop (people getting down and getting in, out of cars and entrance to cars). In regard, another bus stop it will service to the city itself – in front of this bus stop mini buses and taxes will stop. The street coming from the city side passes in front of the regional hospital and through bus stop will turn to the left, to the mahallas. Mentioned in judgment a bakery is located on this street. (Inside the street) The Mahalla consists of one-store private houses and cottages.

The first excerpt from judgment:

On April 29, 2006 in the bus stop which is located in front of the region hospital, in the Tashkent street of the Gulistan city, in the route of Guliston-Tashkent of a large Uzbek highway were directly arrested defendants Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov during theirs receiving money 200,000 Uzbek currency sum and 250 US dollar through blackmail from Uktam Mamatkulov through operative actions by the Jizzakh Region Department of internal affairs police and by the prosecutor’s office employees.

Comment 3: «directly arrested» and «during receiving money … arrested,» – these statements are equal and hereinafter I will use the word «directly arrested».

It is known that «directly arrested» means the detention of a person directly in the commission of a crime in a specific place and exact time by the policy authorities or any civilian person (s). In the case of Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov, directly arrest has done by Jizzakh regional prosecutor’s office and the police. The difference between direct detention or arrest of civilians and police that police officers in order to prevent evasion of the criminal they immediately will tangle hands of the offender.

Where and in which situation was arrested Azam Farmonov?

In all of the above-mentioned three documents states that Azam Farmonov was directly arrested by the Jizzakh regional prosecutor’s office and the police through their operative actions in the bus stop which is located in front of the region hospital, in the Tashkent street of the Gulistan city, in the route of Guliston-Tashkent of a large Uzbek highway. If offender was directly arrested by the prosecutor’s office or by police then person would not have any chance to run away from the place of detention because, firstly, in front of the person will stand police staff, second, person will tangle immediately, third, if in the place of detention there are a lot of people then police in order to keep away from interested eyes during the operative action will try immediately to bring the offender in pre-trial prison or in temporary detention place. This highway is the only way which connects west of Uzbekistan with Tashkent. Accordingly due to this factor bus stop will be crowded on Saturday and Sundays. The event happened on Saturday (on 29 April 2006).

Thus, accordance with the statement of the responsible persons of the prosecutor’s office and the court- K. Mallaev B. Kadirov and E. Khidirbaev that the Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov were an encirclement (surround with) of the prosecutor and the police with handcuffs into the hands.

The second excerpt from judgment:

From the first explanatory letter of the defendant A. Karamatov that U. Mamatkulov in front of the region hospital in Gulistan city took money from the baggage of the car and gave to A. Karamatov and this time A. Karamatov saw two running people in his direction and he threw money on the street and ran to the bakery. Officials took money from the street and took picture with participation of strangers”

From E. Khidirbaev statement: «… he saw two running people in his direction and he threw money on the street and run to the bakery” we can observe and make clear three things: 1) in front of Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov except «victim» U. Mamatkulov there were no any other prosecutors and police officers; 2) The bakery is located next to the bus stop; 3) A. Karamatov threw money in Gulistan-Tashkent highway and ran.

From the first argument: A. Karamatov after receiving money from U. Mamatkulov saw some two people who were running in his direction and he started running away. This means in front of A. Farmonov and A. Karamatov there were no one except U. Mamatkulov and his hands were not with handcuffs, and therefore, there was no direct arrest.

From the second argument: The statement of Judge E. Khidirbaev is totally absurd (actually quite far from reality), because there is no bakery next to the bus station. Bakery far from the bus station is about 200 (two hundred) meters and it is located on the other side of railway bed, permanent way. In order to run to the bakery one should get from the old stairs width of 2 meters along the concrete slab and should high out along the railway Hill (in bulk), after that from the peak (in bulk) should pass over the double-side railroads and should get down to the other side from the stairs which are the worse than previous and after that should run to the bakery about 100 meters. While A. Karamatov was jumping to bakery then two policemen were able easily to catch him. So, where was that time these policemen? In general, whether they were there or not? Or they went there for the audience, for show? The conclusion is clear – If 37-year old A. Karamatov was running to the bakery then there were no any operative acting police in railway bed, permament way.

From the third argument: If after receiving money A. Karamatov was running and threw money then he could left, threw money only in large Uzbek highway in Gulistan-Tashkent route because there are no any other road if we consider the judgment statement -there are no other street where the bus stop is located on the railway side. However, this statement of judgment not matches, contrary to the statements of so-call “witnesses” indications. They are written like:

In the morning of April 29, 2006 the police stopped me and was asked to be a witness in some case. He put me in the car and brought me to the bus station next to the regional hospital. There was a shop (kiosk) and one person was sitting and selling different goods. At the other end of the bus stop, there was the half-built building without doors and windows. Inside the room, we saw piles of garbage and above them were lying on a pack of money. Police counted the money in front of me. In addition to witnesses, the letter mentioned the quantity of 100, 200, 500 Uzbek currency. Police wrote the protocol and I signed it”. Only one «witness,» said that when police brought him to the bus station he saw Alisher Karamatov among policemen.

(I quoted the word of a witness because illiterate E. Khidirbaev does not differ from word objective person (kholis) the word witness).

Indeed, how is located mentioned in criminal case objects-the regional hospital, bus stops, and bakery?

About the location of three objects (the Tashkent Street which is in Gulistan-Tashkent direction and part of the large Uzbek highway, bus stop which is located on this street and regional hospital) and about the location of the second bus stop next to the regional hospital and bakery was written in the second commentary. Both the bus stops are located in front of the regional hospital, the first bus stop is located from the regional hospital about 130 meters away, and the second bus stop is located closer to the regional hospital and distance from them about 100 meters. Railroad bed, permament way above the railway is separated these bus stops. According to the criminal investigation and court version, the criminal happened in front of the main, first bus stop.

According to the words of so call by the court «witnesses,» they saw money in the center of a pile of garbage in the half-built building without doors and windows which are located under the roof of the bus stop near to the regional hospital. In the sentences of the judge, E. Khidirbaev mentioned that Alisher Karamatov “… saw two running people in his direction and threw money in the street and was running” So, from above it seemed that Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov while they were receiving money from U. Mamatkulov they were in front of the main bus stop in the Gulistan-Tashkent route. There is no other street. Therefore, Alisher Karamatov might only throw money in the highway, as the judge wrote that «… threw the money in the street and ran out to the Bakery. Once again will note: Distance between the bakery and the place where the criminal was committed at least 200 meters and they are located in different parts of the railway bed.

Is it possible run from the scene of the crime to the bakery which is located 200 meters away? One can run to 5-10 (five) meters in a smooth way away from the building (house, apartment). But from the place of the scene of the crime to bakery there are no any smooth, flowing street, way. In order to run away from the place of criminal to the bakery, one should pass first of all double-sided railroad bed. For that one first should get up to the high railroad bed through passing concrete slab which is width of 2 meters and with completely destroyed of stairs, second, should jump above four rails and should run minimum 10 meters, third, should get down on the other side of the stairs which are the worse than previous. Without doubts, we can say that in order to pass that mentioned hurdles 200 meters one should run equal to 400 meter smooth way. So, where is the logic? How can we state that person ran to the bakery which is 200 meter far from the place of crime and with serious hurdles way? How much time is required to 37-year-old man (Alisher Karamatov) to run to the bakery by passing these serious hurdles way? He is not the Usain Bolt Jamaican sprinting world champion for running a short distance! I am sure that for this at least ten (10) minutes at a time required to Alisher Karamatov.

QUESTION: Where was the operative acting group of policemen while Alisher Karamatov was running to the bakery direction? Did they were sent to arrest the criminals or for watching from the back of the running criminals?

It is not possible to explain below questions:

(1) How is the money thrown by the A. Karamatov to highway appeared to the next side of the railway bed in the half-built building without doors and windows which are located under the roof of the bus stop near to the regional hospital?

(2) Suppose Alisher Karamatov with a package of money ran via the railway road and have reached to the bus stop next to the regional hospital. If Alisher Karamatov by running (away) went there and while passing this place he has thrown package money to the above mentioned half-built room then who has separated money from the package and put them on a pile of garbage?

(3) If Alisher Karamatov by running (away) reach the bus stop and further by running reached to the bakery in this case where were the operative acting group of policemen who directly arrested them? Where lost the operation “direct arrest of Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov»? If they first detained two criminals and then released one of them and gave him a chance to ran from the place of crime and they could not catch him for a distance of 200 meters till bakery then how we can call this group as an operative acting group?

These three conclusions we cannot reject:

1) Operative event for the detention of Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov was not carried out by the Jizzakh regional prosecutor’s office and police officers on April 29, 2006 in the morning at around 7-30, in the area in front of the hospital, in the bus stop which is located in the Tashkent street in the route of Guliston-Tashkent of a large Uzbek highway;

2) It was not the fact of receiving money from “victim” Uktam Mamatkulov by “blackmailers” Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov on April 29, 2006 in the morning at around 7-30, in the area in front of the hospital, in the bus stop which is located in the Tashkent street in the route of Guliston-Tashkent of a large Uzbek highway;

3) It was not direct arrest of Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov in the morning of April 29, 2006, at 7-30 by the Jizzakh region prosecutor’s office and police officers in the area in front of the hospital, in the bus stop which is located in the Tashkent street in the route of Guliston-Tashkent of a large Uzbek highway;

Facts of the innocence of Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov have proved.

Above mentioned proof we can state:

(I) it was not the fact of demanding money through extortion by Azam Farmonov from U. Mamatkulov;

(II) The decision made by K. A. Mallaev – counselor of Justice, senior investigator on special cases of the division of investigation of Jizzakh regional prosecutor department on 29 April 2008 №1-110/2006 concerning of criminal proceedings was unlawful and consists of slander.

From above based on indisputable facts and proves:

1) (A) Arrest by the law-enforcement officials on April 29, 2006 was completely illegal –

(B) Trial of Yangiyer city criminal court on June 15, 2006 by preceding judge E. Khidirbaev and sentences about 9 years of imprisonment was completely illegal –

(C) Change the term of punishment from July 2006, in the village of Jaslyk, Kungrat district of the Republic of Karakalpakstan, in UY 64/71 penal institution was completely illegal –

(D) In April 2015 by sentences of Kungrat district criminal court completely illegal was extended prison term for 5 years and 26 days

I strongly assert that Azam Turgunovich Farmonov is completely innocent

2) I consider that Azam Farmonov should be immediately released from prison unconditionally

3) Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov became political-juridical victims of prosecutors, police, and judicial authorities – K. Mallaev, B. Kadirov, E. Khidirbaev and judge of the district criminal court (his name is not yet known to me). Such kind of bad people, unfortunately, can we observe in these organs;

4) I consider that only by justice decision of Supreme Court we can prevent and eliminate criminal acts and corruption of people like K .Mallaev B. Kadirov, E. Khidirbaev and others dishonest people.

Respected Chairman of the Supreme Court!

1) By considering my sincere the petition I would like to request you for making judgment for immediate release Azam Farmonov from prison;

2) To immediate sending the judgment to the Penitentiary General Directorate (GUIN) to Abdikarim Shodiev and to the head of 64/71;

3) To make a decision according to Article 83 part (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code Republic of Uzbekistan concerning to full rehabilitation (justify) of Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov.

Talib Yakubov – participated as Defense Counsel in the criminal case №1-110/ 006 of Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov.

QUESTION: 1) Why the Chairman of the Supreme Court Boritosh Mustafayev did not respond to the above-mentioned and four times sent complaint letter? ANSWER: He cannot answer. In order to answer, he should have in his hand facts which will cancel my proof. However, he could not have any facts which can deny my proof.

2) Why we (My daughter Ozoda Yakubova, Lawyer Abdurahmon Tashanov and me) have sent this complaint letter addressed to the Chairman of the Supreme Court much time? Because is in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan there is an article concerning “Investigation of Newly Discovered Circumstances”. Sometimes it can be a mistake in the process of investigation of the criminal case. It may be natural that human mistake, human factor mistakes in the process of investigation and in the court proceedings. Sometimes this mistake can be observed in democratic countries too. I will explain to the reader: one who is suspected of committing a crime from the his/her arrest until the end of the trial many people will take part in the fate of detained person (including prosecutors, police, and intelligence services as well as ordinary citizens), the investigating officers, attesting witnesses, experts, translators, lawyers, judges, assessors, and so on. In the process of detection of crime by someone or by more of the people might be mistake with ignorance or purposely. However, with the passage of time someone can identify these errors. In this situation in a criminal case will appear “Newly Discovered Circumstances”. If the country’s judicial system is honest and justice than after detection of the newly discovered circumstances staff immediately should start the investigation. About the existence of newly discovered circumstances in the criminal case of Azam Farmonov we mentioned in our complaint. Every day hundreds of complaints, the applications, and other documents will be sent to the Supreme Court. Naturally, the Chairman of the Supreme Court not able to read all the complaints, he will deal with some important issues. However, there are dozens of high-quality professional lawyers to examine the petitions and complaints received by the Supreme Court. They could not have known that there are newly discovered circumstances – Reopening Proceedings in View of Newly Discovered Circumstances is one of the main sections of the Criminal Procedure Code of Republic of Uzbekistan.

Out of 4 (four) times sent complaints 3 (three) of them reached to the Supreme Court – we have postal office receipts about these letters. Did they read our complaint letters? I am sure that have read. Did they have seen the fact of newly discovered circumstances? Yes, they have seen it perfectly. If so, why Chairman of the Supreme Court has ignored our letters, why did not reply? The answer is simple: not responding or ignoring the appeals of citizens depends on the policy of the government in regard o relationship between government and people. At the beginning of 2000, the Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan (HRSU) has studied this issue. HRSU activists and engaged volunteers have provided the survey in several parts of the country among the population. We asked the people one question: «Did you receive an answer for your submitted to the Government bodies’ appeals (petitions, complaints, etc.)?» Theirs answer to our question wondered as. Out of 10 complaints about nine (9), government bodies did not answer. In other words, the response of the government officials to the complaints of the population was only 10%.

Let’s now observe the Constitution Republic of Uzbekistan and the law on citizen’s appeals.

Article2. (Constitution of Republic of Uzbekistan). The state shall express the will of the people and serve their interests. State bodies and officials shall be accountable to the society and citizens.

Look: Ostensibly State bodies and officials shall be accountable to the society and citizens.

In this system they never are accountable. They will show you what the meaning is of to be “accountable, responsible”. We have seen accountability of the Chairman of the Supreme Court already 3 times and responsibility of the head of penal colony UY 64/71 B. Kenjaev.

Article11. (LAW OF THE REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN ОN CITIZENS’ APPEALS)

Applications and complaints are resolved within one month from the date of receipt them by the state bodies, public associations, enterprises, institutions, and organizations. They have to resolve the issues on the merits. For the applications and complaints which are not requiring further investigation and verification, it is required to resolve not later than 15 days.

Pay Attention: “within 1 month…”, “no later than 15 days…” is compulsory. Don’t say this word “compulsory”, “resolve” to the Chairman of the Supreme Court he will be angry. See this respected person did not reply to as for four years. Did we become angry? No! We understand, it is difficult to this person, because if he will say something there are in the top other respected persons who will close his mouth with rags.

If to be serious, in 26 years of independence population is lives under the condition where officials “don’t response” to the complaints. Constitution and laws do not work. Prosecutor’s Office, National Security Service, police and other law enforcement agencies activities by ignoring laws. The penal colonies full with prisoners. Some people more than 20 years is spending they life in the penal colonies. Many people died in this place. During the 21 years from 1994 to 2015 national currency declined more than 1100 times. Official exchange rate was 7 Uzbek sum equal to 1 USD when new currency applied (1July, 1994). Now 6500 sum equal to 1 USD. Question: Is that any link between above mentioned events and Governments policy “don’t respond”. The answer: Yes, of course. About this relationship, one can write 6 books with 1000 pages.

Now, I would like to back to the new Attorney General Ikhtiyor Abdullayev. Tell the true, it has did not come to my mind that if I will write a letter to the I. Abdullayev concerning my son-in-law Azam Farmonov and I will receive an answer. But with the thought that he is also like others, I decided take risk and write him a letter. On 24 June 2015, I have sent a letter to Attorney General via post office.

 

Javob berish

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Изменить )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Изменить )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Изменить )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Изменить )

Connecting to %s