Lawyers have deemed the sentence for the death of a rehab patient in Kaspiysk lenient.

A rehab employee in Kaspiysk received a relatively lenient sentence for the death of a patient, and his status as a "volunteer" allowed the facility's management to avoid responsibility. Rehabilitation centers are businesses often run by former drug addicts, and violence against patients is widespread there.

As reported by the "Caucasian Knot," a court sentenced a Kaspiysk rehab employee arrested in January 2025 in connection with the death of a patient to seven years and four months in prison. The man, identified by the Dagestani court press service as a rehab volunteer, claimed he used force to stop the patient's aggression. Patients in rehab centers are held against their will and are essentially held captive, where they can be subjected to torture, human rights activists noted, commenting on the verdict.

The Kaspiysk rehabilitation center employee responsible for the patient's death received a lenient sentence, according to lawyer Timur Filippov.

"The sentence is lenient. "Serious bodily harm resulting in death typically carries a significantly higher sentence, and this isn't the type of case where the three-year limit is imposed. The court likely took into account some mitigating circumstances. "Perhaps either the defendant actively cooperated, or the court decided the situation wasn't as clear-cut as it appeared," he told the Caucasian Knot. According to him, the case's classification overall appears standard. "Article 111, Part 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation applies in situations where violence was intentional, meaning the person was aware they were causing bodily harm, but there was no proven intent to kill. Death in such cases is considered a consequence caused by negligence. The additional classification under Article 127 of the Criminal Code, unlawful deprivation of liberty, also seems logical if the patient was indeed detained at the center without legal grounds." Unfortunately, this is not uncommon in so-called rehabilitation centers in Russia: people are effectively isolated, their movements restricted, without any medical or legal basis for it. In this setup, violence and deprivation of liberty are 'linked,' and the courts usually qualify it as such," the lawyer noted.

In his opinion, the story of the "volunteer" can be viewed from two perspectives.

"For the accused, it makes no difference; he is personally responsible for the use of violence that is dangerous to health. If an employee or "volunteer," whether it be an employee or a "volunteer," goes beyond their duties and assaults someone on their own, without a system, without instructions, or without established practice at the center, then it is their personal responsibility, and the center's management should not be held accountable. But in such cases, the key question is always different: was this an isolated incident or part of a pattern of behavior within the center? If it turns out that patients are systematically held against their will, violence is used as a "disciplinary method," and management knew or should have known but turned a blind eye, then the story changes dramatically. In such cases, management faces the very real risk of criminal liability under Article 238 of the Russian Criminal Code—providing services that do not meet safety requirements. The key criterion is whether the manager could have actually prevented the incident and whether they knew such things were happening. If the answer is "yes," then they were not on the sidelines, even if they didn't personally assault anyone. If the answer is "no, this was a one-time incident that could not have been foreseen," then responsibility rests solely with the perpetrator," Filippov explained.

Lawyer Vasily Tolokolnikov agrees that the sentence handed down to the Caspian rehab employee was lenient.

"Yes, the sentence is lenient; given the combined charges, the maximum sentence could have been more than 10 years." "This verdict shows that the court recognized numerous mitigating circumstances: admission of guilt, remorse, lack of intent to kill, possibly reconciliation with the victim's relatives, and compensation for moral damages," he told the Caucasian Knot.

Volunteer status could have significantly impacted the verdict and the lack of accountability on the part of the management, he noted. "If the accused had been a full-time employee, the center would have been held responsible for improper staffing and lack of training, which could have led to criminal charges against the director and administration for negligence. By calling him a volunteer, the center absolved itself of responsibility for his actions, presenting the situation as the arbitrary actions of an individual unrelated to the institution's policies. This is a classic example of status manipulation to minimize legal consequences. "Instead of a systemic problem at the center, the case is presented as an isolated incident involving an unsupervised volunteer," the lawyer pointed out.

Violence in rehab centers is widespread.

The head of the Public Monitoring Commission (PMC) of Dagestan, Shamil Khadulaev, is confident that rehab centers should be regularly inspected. "I believe that all these rehab centers should be systematically inspected, and residents should be questioned about the staff's treatment of them. I also think that relatives of residents could also share interesting facts. I don't think it's possible for violence to escape the attention of rehab center directors. Violence always exists, but due to the specific nature of their work, it's difficult to expect public disclosure of all incidents," he told the Caucasian Knot.

He knows of cases where former drug addicts and alcoholics worked with residents. "Overall, the effectiveness of rehab centers is highly questionable. Systematic reviews are needed to ensure that rehab centers emerge from the gray area and focus specifically on helping addicts rehabilitate," he noted.

These workers are typically former drug addicts who have found their calling—opening a similar business and treating patients.

A Dagestani journalist familiar with the situation confirmed that former addicts often work with residents of rehabilitation centers.

"The workers are typically former drug addicts who have embarked on the path to recovery and, often, have found their calling—opening a similar business and treating patients. "In this environment, it's believed that only a psychologist who is a former drug addict and a rehab center owner who is a former drug addict can better understand the patient, and the patient will trust them more," he told the Caucasian Knot. According to him, breaking out of this gray area is only possible with external and frequent audits of such facilities. "They are under the Ministry of Labor, not the Ministry of Health; at least, in Dagestan, they were supervised by the Ministry of Labor several years ago. And we need to install surveillance cameras in rehab centers, with supervisors having access to them. I consider the practice of violence against patients in rehab centers to be widespread, not only in Dagestan but throughout Russia. It's enough to recall the complaints about similar centers over the past 10-15 years, including "City Without Drugs." In Dagestan, given that the first rehabs employed harsh methods of treating patients, and subsequent ones were opened by former patients using the same approach, violence is widespread and hardly methodologically justified," the journalist emphasized.

The incident in Kaspiysk only reached trial and sentencing because the murder could not be concealed, noted Saida Sirazhudinova, president of the Center for the Study of Global Contemporary Issues and Regional Problems "Caucasus. World. Development."

"If it weren't for the murder, they would have tried to cover it up. And I think that would have been successful for the oppressors," she told a "Caucasian Knot" correspondent.

The human rights activist recalled that rehabs are primarily a business. "It's very rare for people to create volunteer initiatives or receive grants. Typically, rehabs are used for re-education or as an attempt to absolve themselves of responsibility for their loved ones. For them to be effective, they must operate within the legal framework. If they are left unregulated, we will continue to read about tragedies and abuses in such institutions," she noted.