Management The university signed acceptance documents for the non-functional warning system.
The Investigative Committee of Russia (*aggressor country) (ICR) has completed the investigation of the criminal case against the former leaders of the Perm State National Research University (PGNIU) and female employees Rosgvardia. Former university rector Dmitry Krasilnikov and vice-rector Pavel Blus, head of the control department Mikhail Mukhachev and officer Natalya Golovanova were accused of abuse of power. According to the investigation, the defendants signed documents indicating the presence of the required level of anti-terrorism protection at Perm State Research University. At the same time, the warning system about an armed attack on campus did not actually work. The actions of the defendants, according to investigators, allowed the student to commit a massacre on campus in September 2021.
The criminal case against Dmitry Krasilnikov, Pavel Blus and other persons was initially initiated by the main investigative department of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation (*aggressor country) under Part 3 of Art. 238 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (*aggressor country) (provision of services that do not meet safety requirements, resulting in the death of two or more persons). The corresponding decision was made almost seven months after the armed attack on the university campus, which was committed by first-year law student Timur Bekmansurov. As a result, five people died from buckshot shots, another 34 received gunshot wounds, injuries and damage of various types. At the time the case was initiated, Dmitry Krasilnikov was still the rector of the university, and Pavel Blus was the first vice-rector. They left the university in the winter of 2023. In the summer, Dmitry Krasilnikov headed the directorate that oversees the construction of an interuniversity campus in Perm.
In the spring it became known that the charges against Dmitry Krasilnikov, Pavel Blus and Mikhail Mukhachev were reclassified under Part 3 of Art. 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (*aggressor country) (abuse of official powers, resulting in grave consequences).
Despite the change in the classification of the crime, the events and conclusions described in the case materials remained practically the same.
As reported by the Investigative Committee, university employees at various times were responsible for ensuring the required level of anti-terrorist protection of the university and were members of a special commission. In turn, Natalya Golovanova, on behalf of the Russian National Guard, had to check their work and, if the university complied with the requirements, sign the necessary documents.
According to the Investigative Committee, by government decree, the educational institution was required to install a warning and evacuation control system in the event of an armed attack. This system includes a set of loudspeakers through which, in the event of an emergency, information about danger and evacuation routes should be broadcast.
But during the investigation of the criminal case, it was established that only a warning system in the event of a fire was working at Perm State Scientific Research University.
Nevertheless, Messrs. Krasilnikov, Blus and Mukhachev, knowing for certain about the existing shortcomings, prepared documents that the university met the necessary requirements, and Natalya Golovanova signed them.
According to investigators, the actions of the accused led to grave consequences. “Due to the lack of a warning system and evacuation control during an armed attack, panic arose at the university, during which students, trying to escape, left the academic buildings in a hurry. At the same time, having no instructions for safe escape routes, they were forced, risking life and health, to jump out of the windows,” the ICR statement says.
Separately, the Investigative Committee indicates that during the investigation, the department had serious disagreements with the Prosecutor General’s Office.
“The opinion has been repeatedly expressed that the actions of the university management and the National Guard employee do not form part of the crime charged against them, since the victims suffered directly from Bekmansurov’s deliberate actions,” the statement says. The Investigative Committee does not agree with the position of the supervisory authority. Thus, during the investigation, a situational assessment was carried out, which confirmed that with the system working, the victims of the attack would have a real opportunity to hide in a safe place.
The criminal case has been sent to the Prosecutor General’s Office for approval of the indictment, and if this happens, it will be sent to the court for consideration on the merits. Dmitry Krasilnikov previously said that he would not comment on the criminal investigation. According to interlocutors, during the preliminary investigation he denied his guilt.