December 4 #MOSCOW, December 4 (RIA Novosti)
Kommersant
Fraud Case Hits Statute of Limitations
News broke yesterday that fraud charges had been dropped against Sergei Tsivilev, former first deputy head of
Russian aircraft corporation MiG, and his deputy, Oleg Fadeyev. They were accused of abusing their authority, with grave consequences: they invited unlicensed firms to provide components for fighter planes supplied to Algeria and low-quality and counterfeit spare parts. The $1.3 billion contract was canceled. But the Federal Security Service (FSB) decided to close the high-profile case because the statute of limitations period had expired.
The case was opened in 2009. According to the investigation, Tsivilev and Fadeyev “signed contracts with commercial organizations to restore and acquire defective spare parts for list prices and also approved acceptance reports despite obvious breaches by the contractors.”
Among these contracts were those concluded between MiG and an intermediary, Volga-Aviaservis, which supplied 34.2 million rubles worth of defective parts, and entailed the unwarranted spending of “considerable financial funds” and the delivery to Algeria of “low quality products in breach of the international contract.”
The $1.3 billion contract with Algeria was concluded in March 2006 during a visit by President Vladimir Putin to that country and stipulated the supply of 28 combat and six training MiG planes, as well as spare components for them. But in May 2007, after the Algerian side took delivery of 15 MiGs, said it found sub-quality parts in the aircraft and in October of the same year threatened to renege on other deals if Russia didn’t take the planes back.
In 2008, the parties agreed on the return, and the aircraft were sent back to Russia’s armed forces.
The FSB filed charges against Tsivilev and Fadeyev under Article 201 of the Criminal Code (abuse of power) but the investigation became so protracted that it reached the six-year statute of limitations period. As a result, the investigation did not even confront the principals with a final indictment, but decided to drop the criminal hearings for non-exonerating reasons. Tsivilev and Fadeyev agreed, although they refused to admit their guilt.
“The investigation did not have a proper subject for examination, and the termination of the case is proof of that,” Tsivilev told Kommersant.
It may be recalled that the abandoned case followed another scandal surrounding the MiG corporation that erupted in 2006. It involved an attempt to sell a quantity of old, used and counterfeit spare parts for MiG-29 fighters for 18 million rubles to the Polish Defense Ministry. Moscow prosecutors established that Tsivilev concluded a contract in 2005 with Musail Ismailov, general director of Aviaremsnab, to supply the corporation with avionics intended for delivery to Poland. But the charge of major scale fraud was filed against Ismailov alone. The accusation against Tsivilev was dropped because the prosecutors found it “premature.”
Izvestia
Russian Police Tailor Bulletproof Vests to Accommodate Female Curves
Russia’s Ministry of the Interior has announced a long-awaited present to 150,000 female police officers: adaptation of heavy and uncomfortable bulletproof vests to the specifics of a female body.
The ministry will announce a tender to design new vests especially for women.
The number of women in police and military service is growing in Russia as well as around the world. Most have to wear men’s protection because no one ever designed one for women. The ill-fitting vests are a problem when using firearms.
Women serving as security at state agencies complain that they have to wear heavy protection and a helmet throughout their shift, which causes backache.
“Men’s vests are very uncomfortable,” a police woman said. “They are tight around the chest and not snug enough around the stomach.”
The husbands of several female officers agreed that wearing men’s protection affects their health. “My wife always complains of backache when she comes home from work,” an interior officer said. Even strong men sometimes have health problems from wearing protective gear.
“When you are wearing a 10-14 kilo vest with 6th level protection, it starts to hurt after 15 minutes,” a riot police officer said. “With lighter protection, it can start after a few hours. Many officers have spinal problems, most often herniated discs.”
Bulletproof vests are only a part of the problem. The entire riot police outfit weighs about 50 kilos. This is too much for most woman, so they often opt for lighter, 2nd level protection.
The United States was the first country to address the problem. Last summer, they designed the first ever bulletproof vests for women: which are shorter and adjustable in the chest area.
The new equipment is now being tested by the Screaming Eagles of the 101st Airborne Division. Russia’s Interior Ministry decided to keep abreast because the proportion of men and women in the US Army and Russian police is similar. Of the 165,000 female service personnel in Russia, 18,500 serve with the interior troops, including 1,500 officers.
Female vests have long been offered at Moscow military stores. “We have light concealable body armor for women,” a source said. These vests provide 1st level protection using different materials than the professional army vests. A 1.5 kilo female vest costs 70,000 rubles ($2,270) while conventional men’s heavy armor is available for 13,000 rubles ($420). The latter are 5th and 6th level and can even resist Kalashnikov or sniper rifle fire.
“There are modern lighter options,” said Yaroslav Svintsov, member of the public council of the Interior Ministry’s
Main Directorate for the Central Federal District. “They use a special protective fabric layer, but some could not stop knife thrusts during testing.”
A ministry source reassured Izvestia that they will bend every effort to make their female personnel’s lives easier and will have specially designed female body armor ready by November 2014.
Vedomosti
How to Get Your Bribe Back
More high-profile bribery cases have been revealed almost every day over the past few weeks. This “witch hunt” could be aimed at sprucing up the tainted image of the officials or reallocating the power and money between the clans. Whatever the reasons, the grounds for these cases are real. And only few believe the corruption allegations are falsified.
Critics argue that punishing a few bribe takers will not eliminate a system-wide problem. Yet every new exposure has the potential to trigger a serious fight against corruption, making punishment for bribe taking inevitable. On the other hand, the public has little faith that will happen. It would be much easier to change the rules and eliminate the incentive for taking bribes.
Developing countries are seriously considering a solution suggested by Kaushik Basu. In 2011, the then Chief Economic Adviser of the Indian government wrote a paper on legalizing certain kinds of bribes. He proposed protecting the bribe givers and doubling the fine for the bribe takers. He also suggested that the bribe be returned to the giver.
So, what types of bribes are there? Pranab Bardhan, a founder of modern corruption theory, uses the Russian terms ‘mzdoimstvo’ (venality) and ‘likhoimstvo’ (extortion) to describe, respectively, bribes taken to expedite a legal service and bribes taken to perform a service illegally. Basu suggests punishment for ‘mzdoimstvo,’ taking a bribe for services that are supposed to be performed without one. This approach would certainly cut down on the total number of bribes taken.
Economists Martin Dufwenberg and Giancarlo Spagnolo offer an advanced approach. Bribes should be returned to those bribe-givers who report the corruption, an approach that has proved to be quite successful in exposing cartels. But whistleblowers need motivation - and immunity – in order to disclose plots.
Dufwenberg and Spagnolo’s article shows that the Basu approach would be a realistic anti-corruption measure in Russia, where a law already exists on making deals with investigators. Even though both the giver and the taker of a bribe are both formally breaking the law, the giver is still seen as a victim by society.
It is not easy to provide sufficient evidence of bribery and this could be a drawback in the Basu approach. However more and more people these days have access to various recording devices.
On the downside, legalizing bribery would undermine the power of law – potentially a much bigger problem. A legal state cannot exist without a powerful rule of law. Respect for the law is one of the main social norms – and the best way for society to achieve its goals at minimum cost. In the long term, society and the economy would have to pay a higher price for disrespect of the law.
But the tolerance level for bribery in Russia is now dangerously high. The rules of the game are that you have to give bribes so you can’t blame someone else for doing the same thing. So the rules won’t change as long as people are ready to pay. Change is possible only when corruption becomes intolerable, rather than because of a law that cannot be enforced.
RIA Novosti is not responsible for the content of outside sources.
