On December 15, 2025 the Press Service of the State Security Service (SSS) issued a statement titled “Criminal acts of the former head of the Balakan District Executive Authority have been exposed”. The statement noted that the former head of the Balakan District Executive Authority, Islam Rzayev, had been detained, found guilty of a number of criminal acts, and was held accountable under Articles 179.3.2 (large-scale embezzlement) and 311.3.2 (repeated bribery) of the Criminal Code, and was placed under pre-trial detention.
But to what extent is the statement in question legal in terms of the principle of the presumption of innocence?
In accordance with the principle of the presumption of innocence, every individual accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty according to the law and by a final judgment of a court. Even the existence of reasonable doubts about the guilt of an individual does not constitute grounds for presenting or finding him guilty of a crime.
This principle is enshrined in both Article 63 of the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan and Article 6.2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. No individual may be considered to have committed a crime without a court verdict, and statements by state authorities should not undermine this fundamental principle.
The statement released by the State Security Service is problematic from the very title. The sentence “The criminal acts of the former head of the Balakan District Executive Authority have been exposed” creates the impression that the conversation is not about suspicions in a criminal case that is still under investigation, but about guilt that has already been proven.
Even though the text of the statement initially states that “reasonable suspicions have arisen” that Rzayev committed certain acts, it is immediately followed by the statement that it has been “determined” that the person committed specific criminal acts. Such a sequence of presentation and the selected statements blur the line between the investigation stage and the court verdict, and form the conclusion that the person’s guilt has already been confirmed.
However, neither the Constitution nor the Code of Criminal Procedure (Article 21) grants the investigative body the authority to present an individual as guilty of a crime without a court verdict. In this regard, the expressions used in the statement are inconsistent with the essence of the principle of the presumption of innocence.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has so far issued 11 decisions against Azerbaijan under Article 6.2 of the Convention. In 10 of these decisions, a violation was found.
According to the ECtHR’s case-law, the presumption of innocence is violated if a statement by a public official about a person accused of a crime reflects an opinion that the person is guilty before his guilt has been proven according to law (Avaz Zeynalov v. Azerbaijan, §68).
The Court stated that while public authorities may inform the public about ongoing criminal proceedings, they must do so only with the necessary caution and discretion. Statements by other public officials in connection with ongoing criminal investigations that lead the public to believe that a suspect is guilty also constitute a breach of the presumption of innocence (Farhad Aliyev v. Azerbaijan, §217).
The ECtHR affirmed that the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Prosecutor General's Office and the Ministry of National Security violated the presumption of innocence with similar statements in the cases of Farhad Aliyev v. Azerbaijan, Muradverdiyev v. Azerbaijan, Huseyn and others v. Azerbaijan, Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan, Ilgar Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, Khadija Ismayilova v. Azerbaijan (No. 2), Yunusova and Yunusov v. Azerbaijan (No. 2), and Mirgadirov v. Azerbaijan.
“Tribunat” concludes that the expressions used in the statement issued by the State Security Service about the former head of the executive authority, Islam Rzayev, such as “criminal acts have been exposed” and “it has been determined that he committed criminal acts”, do not meet the requirements of caution and restraint necessary for the investigation stage, and the balance between the duty to inform the public and the right of the suspect to be presumed innocent is not observed. Islam Rzayev was presented as guilty in public before his guilt was proven in court, and his right to the presumption of innocence protected by Article 6.2 of the Convention was violated.
