Moskovskiye Novosti
European Court Dismisses Yukos Appeal
The European Court of Human Rights will not review its acquittal of Russia on charges of using its court system in a politically-motivated attack to destroy Yukos, according to Georgy Matyushkin, Russia’s envoy to the ECHR.
The Small Chamber of the court passed a decision in the Yukos versus Russia case in September 2011. The Strasbourg based court agreed that Yukos’ rights to a fair trial and its private property were violated “in certain aspects.” However, according to Yukos lawyer Piers Gardner, procedural violations were not the main issue; the prosecution of Yukos was politically motivated. His opponent, Michael Svenston, who defended the Russian government in the case, insisted that Yukos’ owners were guilty of grand embezzlement.
The court apparently did not find Gardner’s arguments convincing. The Strasbourg court said it found “no indication… or violations in the proceedings... which would have allowed the court to conclude that Russia had misused the proceedings to destroy Yukos and take control of its assets.” Gardner contested the ruling, insisting on an appeal.
According to the established procedure, a review of a case can be accepted by a committee of five ECHR judges headed by the chairman. On March 8, they ruled against an appeal, and that decision cannot be contested, a Strasbourg source said.
Russia was not planning to appeal the decision anyway, Matyushkin said. “We have reason to believe that the European Court has supported the position of the Russian government. I am referring to the absence of political motivation or the selective persecution of the company, as Yukos lawyers claim,” he said. In his words, the court ruling includes several pages describing the less then above board schemes Yukos used to evade taxes. “The court gave a rather unflattering assessment of Yukos’ performance,” he added.
Yukos’ shareholders also claimed an unprecedented compensation of $98 billion, which the court decided to consider separately. “I believe this is one of the largest claims in international practice. Once the court ruling is enforced, both sides will be given time to consider it and try to reach some out of court agreement or express their opinion on the amount awarded,” Matyushkin explained.
But no negotiations are underway at this stage. Both sides are sticking to their respective positions on principle and do not seem likely to concede. “Everyone who was affected by the Yukos bankruptcy should receive some compensation. Apart from the 55,000 shareholders, there are discontent creditors and other concerned parties,” said former Yukos executive Bruce Misamore.
“If you study the court ruling closely, it is obvious that no compensation can be even discussed,” Matyushkin said.
Russia and Yukos shareholders have been given three months to reach an agreement on a settlement.
Komsomolskaya Pravda
Former Moscow Metro Chief Leaves Russia
The former chief of the Moscow Metro, Dmitry Gayev, has left Russia for medical treatment. Gayev is a suspect in an abuse-of-office case, according to the deputy head of the Interior Ministry’s Investigative Department, Alexander Yagodin.
Gayev is alleged to have misappropriated 112 million rubles over 10 years, by accepting royalty payments for a patent granted on an automated ticket surveillance system.
The Prosecutor General’s Office claims that the patented ticket system is the product of an entire team of employees that was led by Gayev. The violation would fall under sec. 1, art. 201 of the criminal code, “abuse of office,” which carries a possible prison term of up to four years.
Yagodin clarified, however, that Gayev had left the country legitimately and with the investigators’ consent. “His case is difficult because his actions are cited by the vaguest sections of the current criminal code. Most loopholes like this have been eliminated,” he said.
Gayev’s defense lawyers have submitted a number of expert reports that act as evidence confirming the legitimacy of his actions. “We are carrying out a number of inspections, too, which will aid in providing a legal evaluation of his acts. It is too early, at this point, to say anything about the fate of this case,” he said.
Nevertheless, Gayev’s departure, no matter how legitimate, leaves open the question of whether he can be expected back. History knows numerous instances, when persons under investigation left for medical treatment abroad and never returned to Russia, for example, Yury Khardikov, the former Prefect of the Northern Administrative Area of Moscow.
Kommersant
Opposition and Observers to Complain About Election Fraud
Russia’s political opposition groups, the Golos association, the Citizen Observer project and the Voters’ League yesterday agreed to coordinate their election fraud complaints. The election’s former candidates are encouraged to file lawsuits on the violation of their rights while voters can file standard complaints to be compiled by lawyers for the above. All of the complaints are to be posted online.
The first meeting, held to coordinate the efforts of voters who wish to complain about election fraud, was attended by those who felt slighted in the election, including the Communist Party, A Just Russia, Mikhail Prokhorov, the Yabloko and Democratic Choice parties, as well as the observer training organizations: Golos and Citizen Observer. It was initiated by Voters’ League member, Andrei Dyomin.
Complaint formats and instructions specifying various kinds of violations will be prepared to help people file legally acceptable lawsuits. Violations like carousel voting or adding votes with lists of names are very difficult to record or prove, said Grigory Melkonyants, deputy director of the NGO Golos. Complaints can be filed only by those voters or candidates whose election rights were violated. “After the State Duma elections, many complaints were denied under the pretext that the claimants’ rights were not violated,” Melkonyants said. “If candidates Zyuganov and Prokhorov agree to file complaints, it will be a big help.” He added that the two candidates seem to understand the situation.
Another goal is to compile a list of violations registered by the Communist Party, A Just Russia and other organizations to register and help monitor the process, which will subsequently strengthen the judicial procedure. The first complaints are expected to be filed in March. Melkonyants said hundreds of complaints could be filed in Moscow against carousel voting, ballot box stuffing and the illegal addition of names to voter lists. “I think we will request the video recordings to check the number of voters” who took part in the election, he said, adding that people outside Moscow also need help with their complaints. The Voters’ League has collected about 9,800 reports provided by volunteer observers. According to the Svodny Protokol consolidated system for processing observer reports, violations were noted during voting and the vote calculation process at 1,578 polling stations, while voters’ rights violations were noted at 676 stations, and disparities between the voting protocol and the data entered in the Vybory automated registration system, at 327 stations.
In spite of all this, the head of the Central Election Commission, Vladimir Churov, said immediately after the election that there were few “real” violations: “The number is unlikely to be more than 300 per 96,000 election districts.” He also believes that “the bulk of the reports on violations are legally inadmissible because they report only possible violations.”
RIA Novosti is not responsible for the content of outside sources.
