In the latest hearing related to the "Dok-1 Max" syrup, which has been associated with the deaths of at least 65 children, former head of the Pharmaceutical Industry Development Agency and one of the lawyers protecting the interests of S.K., Temur Rahmatov, has suggested the possibility that signatures on drug approvals like "Dok-1 Max" and "Ambronol" could be electronic signatures (e-signatures) and not manually signed by the responsible authority.
On the labels attached to the syrup containers, it was indicated that in 2022, 12 drug approvals were granted to Marion Biotech Pvt. Ltd. for 12 different medicines, and during this process, a review of these approvals was carried out. This review is currently underway and it is under consideration whether the previous explanations of the discrepancies (the commentary on the deaths of 65 children) are valid. In the initial hearings, it was established that both ink and facsimile (e-signatures) signatures were used by the Regulatory Authority.
Although the Regulatory Body received facsimile signatures, the documents in the drug approvals do not clearly state whether the signatures were facsimile or personally signed by the responsible authority. Lawyer Temur Rahmatov stated that, according to the documents, the signatures on the drug approvals for "Dok-1 Max" and "Ambronol" do not match those of S.K.
Rahmatov further emphasized that due to this situation, he requested the appointment of forensic and technical expertise in accordance with Article 22 of the Criminal Procedure Code, both in relation to the 12 drug approvals granted to Marion Biotech Pvt. Ltd. in the context of the 65 children's deaths and in relation to the signatures on the approvals issued in March 2022.
"We have not seen the originals of these approvals. Only copies exist. In my opinion, before the approval is given by the agency, a scanned version of the approval is taken. Even if it is done this way, it is not difficult to understand whether the signatures on the approvals are facsimile or personally signed by the responsible authority. This process takes a certain amount of time, and to avoid waiting, we are submitting a petition from now on," the lawyer said.
Rahmatov additionally stated that when comparing the signatures on the copies of the approvals, it is difficult to assume that S.K.'s signature is not genuine.
Regarding the defense's petition to involve expert opinion, the judges and participants in the trial discussed why the petition should be reviewed later and what the reasons were for postponing it. In response, Muso Yusupov, who is leading the judicial process, explained that only one person, U.T., was responsible for the formalization of the statement, and after asking U.T., they would proceed with their questions. He emphasized that U.T. is not the only expert, and there are other state experts in other places as well. After requesting information from U.T., they will continue to address the matter and submit their petition. He asked if there were any objections.
Lawyer Rahmatov noted that he had no objections to the judge's approach regarding the current situation.
Follow Daryo's official Instagram and Twitter pages to keep up to date on world news.
Comments (0)