The case surrounding Pavel Dobryansky, the third assistant aboard the Russian trawler Amur, reached a legal conclusion in Japan with a three year prison term suspended for five years. The prosecution had sought 3.5 years. The incident involved a collision with the Japanese fishing sailboat Hokko-maru-8 near a Hokkaido port, which resulted in three fatalities on the sailboat crew.
According to reports, the decision came from a district court in Asahikawa, located in Hokkaido Prefecture. The defense for the sailor narrative framed the outcome as effectively a five year suspended sentence, noting that he would be deported to the Russian Federation if there is no further criminal offense during the postponement period. The prosecutor and the court confirmed that a suspended sentence may keep the defendant free unless a subsequent offense occurs within the set period, a practice common in the Japanese judicial system. This language implies that the sentence would not require prison time unless violated, while still reserving the option to add time for any new offense [Attribution: RIA Novosti with court records].
What happened at sea is described as a collision between the Amur, a 23-strong crew vessel, and a smaller Japanese sailboat. The Amur reportedly carried a heavy cargo while approaching Mombetsu when the collision occurred, leading to the sinking of the Japanese boat and the loss of three sailors. The Russian embassy in Tokyo conveyed condolences to the families of the fishermen affected by the incident [Attribution: Russian embassy statements].
The legal proceedings named Pavel Dobryansky as a defendant for alleged negligence and improper management of the vessel. The captain of the Japanese sailboat was found guilty under similar charges and received a three year suspended sentence. In parallel, Russian investigators opened a separate procedural review under Russian traffic safety and transport rules, reflecting cross-border cooperation in handling maritime incidents [Citations: Russian authorities, and Japanese court records].
Subsequent court actions in Japan began with the defense maintaining innocence and challenging the prosecution’s assertions. The defense highlighted various factors that they argued undermined the case, including environmental conditions at the time of the collision, such as heavy fog limiting visibility. They noted that the visibility range was restricted to roughly 10-15 meters, a claim supported by assessments from maritime and investigative bodies in the Russian Far East. The Amur, described as a sizeable and sturdy vessel, had moved quickly under certain engine conditions, which the defense argued left the Japanese gulet unable to predict or react in time [Cited: Far East Transport Research Department findings].
The defense also argued that radar and radio communication practices among some Japanese fishing crews could influence the dynamics of such near-miss or collision events. The assertion was that radar use and radio signaling were not consistently employed by the Japanese side, which the defense contended affected situational awareness during the incident. Additionally, the defense pointed to the Amur’s swift response by stopping engines, which, in their view, should have altered the other vessel’s maneuvering needs and prevented a tighter encounter, especially in challenging visibility conditions [Citations: investigative reports and defense statements].