The case of a contract soldier from Vladikavkaz highlighted the problem of violations of the rights of military personnel.

A Vladikavkaz resident held a picket to demand that the sentence imposed on her son for deserting his unit, despite him being deemed fit for service despite a spinal injury sustained at a training ground, be overturned. Human rights activists called the return of soldiers who had not fully recovered to duty a systemic practice.

As reported by the "Caucasian Knot," on September 24, 2022, Parts 2.1, 3.1, and 5 of Article 337, concerning unauthorized abandonment of a unit or place of service during mobilization, were introduced into the Russian Criminal Code. The amendments provide for imprisonment for up to 10 years. Tightening of legislation after the announcement of mobilization led to harsher sentences for absence from a military unit or desertion.

The mother of a serviceman demands that her son's sentence be overturned

Vladikavkaz resident Maira Babayan, the mother of Mnatsakan Kasparov, who was convicted of leaving his unit without leave, has been holding a non-stop picket in a Vladikavkaz square for a week now. She is demanding that the sentence, which she believes was unjustly handed down, be overturned, despite it being upheld by the appellate court, the Astra publication (included in the register of foreign agents) reported on March 26.

Denied medical care, saying he was healthy

"According to Babayan, her son was wounded and evacuated only a few days later. Complaining of severe pain, he went to a hospital in Vladikavkaz, but, Babayan claims, he was denied medical care, saying he was healthy. After this, the serviceman went to the Beslan city hospital, where he was diagnosed with a complex hip fracture and had his tailbone removed. After the surgery, a case of special ops was opened against him," the publication states.

The convicted man's story attracted the attention of the ombudsman and a member of parliament

The situation was responded to North Ossetia's Human Rights Commissioner Artur Kokayev and local LDPR parliamentary deputy Soslan Bestayev, the publication writes.

A medical examination involving specialized specialists has been organized.

Artur Kokayev On March 25, he reported on his Telegram channel that he visited Babayan's son in Pretrial Detention Center No. 1 in Vladikavkaz on March 20. "No complaints were received from the prisoner during personal communication; doctors assess his health as satisfactory. Taking into account his wishes, an additional medical examination was organized with the participation of specialized specialists. In turn, the family has been repeatedly offered qualified legal assistance as part of the ongoing legal proceedings," he wrote.

According to the military prosecutor's office of the Vladikavkaz garrison, the soldier served in the Voronezh garrison and was granted sick leave on November 29, 2024, "with a return to duty date of January 14, 2025." However, the soldier did not return to his unit that day, remaining at his place of residence in Vladikavkaz, the ombudsman reported.

On April 16, 2025, the soldier sought medical attention and was diagnosed with acute respiratory disease. He was granted release until April 22. However, he remained in Vladikavkaz after that. On May 14, he was admitted to hospital for treatment, discharged on June 9, and handed over to military commandant's office staff. On July 23, a criminal case was opened under Article 337 of the Russian Criminal Code.

"On July 24, 2025, the serviceman underwent a military medical examination, which found him graded "A" – fit for military service. The serviceman did not appeal the medical examination's results," Kokayev wrote.

On November 13, 2025, the accused was found guilty under Part 5 of Article 337 of the Russian Criminal Code and sentenced to 5.5 years in prison. He appealed the verdict, but the Southern District Military Court upheld the verdict, the publication notes.

In turn, Soslan Bestayev reported on his Telegram channel on March 24 that he had submitted a parliamentary inquiry and received an official report on the criminal case. According to him, the soldier was injured at a training ground in the LPR.

He explained that Babayan's son signed a contract in September 2024, and "a couple of weeks later, he fell at a training ground in the LPR and broke a lumbar vertebra." "He was treated in Voronezh, then transferred to a convalescent regiment—a rehabilitation unit that doesn't participate in the Air Defense Forces and doesn't send anyone there. He was given sick leave until January 2025. He didn't return to his unit, remaining in Vladikavkaz. He had brief sick leave, but again failed to report to either his unit or command. In May 2025, he was hospitalized with severe back pain. After his discharge in June, he was transferred to the military commandant's office, and from there, to a collection point for those who left their unit without permission," the deputy wrote. Bestayev emphasized that the soldier has no combat experience, injuries, or awards. "This has been officially confirmed. A motion to suspend the case is not planned," the publication stated. The deputy recalled that "absenteeism after a contract and receiving payment is a criminal offense." "And courts at all levels have confirmed this. For my part, I am ready to provide full legal support in preparing and filing a cassation appeal so that a higher authority can once again verify everything strictly in accordance with the law," he wrote.

Human rights activists have called the return of partially recovered soldiers to service a common practice.

Ivan Chuvilyaev, a representative of the "Go to the Forest" movement (included in the register of foreign agents), and Sergei Krivenko, director of the human rights group "Citizen. Army. Law" (included in the register of foreign agents), commented on Mnatsakan Kasparov's story to the "Caucasian Knot."

Both noted that stories of partially recovered soldiers being sent to combat zones are quite common.

The goal there isn't even to cure the person. There's a goal there to somehow patch him up.

"This is the most common case. I'd say that the opposite situations would be the exception. Usually it happens like this: a person is wounded or perhaps injured at the front. He's sent to a military hospital, but not treated there, simply because, as far as we understand from our experience, there's no such goal there - to cure the person. The goal is to somehow patch him up, at best. Then there's the VVK, the military medical commission, which always says the person is fit, that everything is fine with him, healthy, whole, and gives him, at best, 40 days for rehabilitation. It's a stable process. After rehabilitation, after these 40 days, he must return to his unit. That's it," said, in particular, Ivan Chuvilyaev.

In his opinion, after 40 It's not always possible to recover within days. "And so he [the soldier], as a result, didn't show up for his unit. He was put on the wanted list, and then, apparently, detained. This, I repeat, is a very common story," the human rights activist emphasized.

VVKs don't take into account fitness. This is a real phenomenon.

Sergey Krivenko also noted that such cases are quite common. "These are very common cases, since military hospitals are overcrowded. There are many complaints (both to us and to other organizations) about VVKs not taking fitness into account. This is a real phenomenon," he stated.

Krivenko called this situation a violation of the soldier's rights. "By law, he has the right to health protection. The main thing here is that the VVK recognizes the fitness/unfitness determination. In this case, it's necessary to obtain a confession from the VVK and appeal its decisions. This is very difficult and nerve-wracking, but it can be achieved, albeit difficult," he noted.

As for the criminal case, according to Krivenko, there's a "gray area." "On the one hand, the investigator formally has the right to initiate a case. On the other, the soldier has the right to health protection. If he had proven unfit for service due to health reasons (at least temporarily, until the end of treatment), then the case should have been dismissed, since civilians are not subject to criminal liability for leaving their unit without permission," Sergei Krivenko pointed out.