Today the Moscow Basmanny District Court will consider the complaint by Alexey Navalny against Kirovles case resumption. The opposition leader asked to reverse the decision on the resumption of the criminal case.
On July 31, the Investigation Committee charged Navalny with “masterminding the squandering of Kirovles' property in especially large amount". The investigation suggests that in the period from May through September 2009, more than 10,000 cubic meters of timber belonging to Kirovles were stolen. The actions caused damage to the regional budget estimated at over 16 million rubles. Navalny faces up to ten years in jail with a possible additional fine of up to one million roubles.
On the eve of the complaint consideration, the Investigative Committee (SKR) conducted a search in Kobyakovskaya Lozopleteniye Plant owned by the parents of Alexey Navalny. SKR says that the investigators were looking for evidence on the criminal case of the embezzlement of the property of Kirovles enterprise.
The plant of Navalny’s family is located in Odintsovo district in the Moscow region.
The company is engaged in manufacturing of furniture and art objects from osier. It employs six people. According to the Unified State Register of Legal Entities (EGRUL), in 2010, Alexey Navalny was one of its founders: he brought 25% of the share capital in the amount of 250 thousand rubles. Other owners of the production are his relatives.
"The search is due to the fact that one of the founders of Kobyakovskaya Lozopleteniye Plant is Alexey Navalny who is involved in the criminal case on the embezzlement of property of the Kirovles enterprise as a defendant”, the SK explained. “Investigators intend to find objects and documents that could point to Navalny’s illegal activities in 2009”, the Committee said.
The criminal case against Navalny was repeatedly submitted to the central staff of the Russian Investigation Committee and then returned for an additional investigation. Finally, Kirov detectives did not find corpus delicti in Navalny’s actions. However, on July 5, 2012, head of the Investigation Committee Alexander Bastrykin criticized harshly his subordinates. “You had a criminal case against this person, and you stop it on the sly!”, he said. After that the investigation was reopened.
SKR already declared that the legal investigation on Kirovles case wasn't connected in any way with “the claims of mister Navalny to Alexander Bastrykin”. However, the lawyer thinks differently. “The case has been fabricated, and the charges look ridiculous”, he said. “Under the pretext of investigation of the criminal case, Bastrykin are given a free hand against me”.
Remind that earlier Navalny published in his blog materials that Bastrykin had business and residence permit in the Czech Republic. On August 28, the Prosecutor General's office launched a probe on Navalny’s complaint against the head of the SKR Alexander Bastrykin.
However, experts believe that it shouldn’t wait for any sensations from the work of the supervisory body, and Bastrykin will remain at his post. Thus, the former Prosecutor General Yury Skuratov treats the current probe skeptically. In his opinion, even in the case of identification of some Bastrykin’s violation, there may be no criminal aspect found. It can only be a violation of public prosecutor's ethics, Skuratov believes. In addition, he questioned the objectivity of the conclusions of the Prosecutor General's office linking it with the difficult relations between the Prosecutor General Yury Chaika and Alexander Bastrykin.
Since the second half of the 2000's, formerly a professional stocks trader, Navalny became interested in issues of minority shareholders. In 2008, he began to actively engage in so-called "Invest-activism" - buying small stakes in large companies (in particular, he is a minority shareholder in Surgutneftegaz, Transneft, Rosneft, Gazpromneft, TNK-BP, « Sberbank and VTB), and then insisted on the rights of the shareholder disclosure about the activities of the management, which could effect the income of the shareholders and transparency of companies.
Source: “Vedomosti” № 248 of 30.12.2009
In autumn 2006 the press pointed to Navalny as one of the organizers of "Russian March" prepared by nationalist organizations, but he categorically denied it. Nevertheless, Navalny participated as an observer in the meetings of the committee organizing the demonstration on the purposes of protection of citizens' rights to hold peaceful assemblies.
Source: "Novye Izvestiya" on 02.11.2006
A major scandal, organized by Navalny, was an alleged embezzlement of $ 150 million by the branch officials of state-owned bank VTB after the purchase of 30 Chinese oil platforms in 2007. The government initially refused to file a criminal case, saying that there was a sufficient reason for this, but later the Moscow prosecutor's office sent the case file to the police to consider the issue of a criminal case initiation.
Source: www.stockinfocus.ru from 10.03.2010
Alexey Navalny organized a project for the channel TVC - the program "Boytsovsky Club” (Fight Club). In April 2007, after only two shows, that persormed a high rating, the program was suddenly withdrawn off the air. Navalny connected the closure of the program with the existence of "stop-list" made by authorities, forbidding appearance of certain individuals on television.
In November 2007, Alexey Navalny participated in the meeting of the organizing committee of "Russian March" as an observer. Navalny publicly stated that he did not declaim any slogans of "Russian March". In this regard, deputy chairman of Yabloko, Sergey Ivanenko made a critical statement, and in December 2007, at a meeting of the Bureau of the Party Navalny demanded the immediate resignation of the party chairman and all of its deputies and the re-election of at least 70 percent of the bureau; by majority vote, he was expelled from Yabloko with the wording "for causing political damage to the party, in particular, for the nationalistic activity "
Source: www.polit.ru from 01.02.2008
In 2007, Navalny figured in scandals related to his ongoing television program "Political debate". In February, during the debate between publicists Julia Latynina and Maxim Kononenko radical nationalists appeared led by Maxim Martsinkewich (nicknamed Tesak /"Slasher"), Navalny gave him floor, confirming his nationalist beliefs. Nevertheless, after the debate Navalny filed a statement on Martsinkewich to the police. In October, after the debate between Maria Gaidar and writer Eduard Bagirov, involving violations of the order in the hall, Navalny fired a traumatic gun in a car mechanic Timur Teziev. According to Navalny, Teziev tried to disrupt the debate: he was sent by the Kremlin structures responsible for internal policy and work with young people, including first deputy head of the Presidential Administration Vladislav Surkov. After a six-month trial case of Navalny’s attack on Teziev was discontinued.
Source: www.vz.ru of 09.03.2007, "Expert" on 02.03.2007, "Nezavisimaya Gazeta" on 09.02.2010
In May 2008, Alexey Navalny announced that he, together with a group of like-minded people, was going to find out why the trader Gunvor sold oil of the largest Russian state and who the beneficial owners were. Navalny said that Rosneft, Gazpromneft and Surgutneftegaz conceal their cooperation with the oil trader from the shareholders. He made a statement that the companies were robbing the shareholders. He demanded in court to open information on contracts concluded by Russian oil corporations with Swiss-registered intermediary firm Gunvor International B.V..The court rejected Navalny’s claims three times. The media believed that Navalny’s interest in Gunvor was due to the revelations of the Russian political analyst Stanislav Belkovsky in the Washington Post about the connection of ex-President Vladimir Putin with the company Gunvor; ostensibly, Putin owns 75 percent of the company Gunvor - oil trader, based in Switzerland; it was settled by Gennady Timchenko , a friend of Vladimir Putin. Alexey Navalny demanded to indicate the volume and conditions on which Rosneft, Gazpromneft, Surgutneftegaz sold oil to Gunvor.
Source: www.newsru.com on May 15, 2008
In December 2008, Alexey Navalny made a statement in the press exposing the managers of Gazprom, who made several deals in their own interest and tried to cash funds in Latvia. He attained the criminal case initiation, which was discontinued on July 10, 2009. Navalny through the Internet has turned for help to the citizens and asked everyone to send an official letter to the prosecutor. Then the Investigation Committee of the Russian Interior Ministry received 512 formal complaints, and the decision to close the case was changed.
Source: www.gorod.tomsk.ru from 27.12.2009
As a shareholder of Gazprom, Alexey Navalny stated that his company was robbed. According to him, Gazprom was able to buy oil directly from the company engaged in oil exploration, but still it allowed a certain third company to be an intermediary in the transaction, thus Gazprom is overpaying for oil twice as much because of intermediaries. The feed would goes directly from catcher to the tube of Gazprom, and the profit goes to the firm- intermediary. At the same time, top managers of Gazprom and the state itself did not recognize themselves the victim. Nevertheless, Navalny, as a shareholder of Gazprom, was officially recognized a victim in the criminal case of theft of money from Mezhregiongaz - one of the subsidiaries of the company. There were six defendants in the criminal case instituted on thefts. Those were deputy director of Mezhregiongaz Igor Dmitriev, Director of "Novatek" Alexander Lyadov, former CEO of OOO Transinvestgaz Galina Sheremet, Tatyana Gulyaeva, the former chief accountant of "Trastinvestgaz", the CEO of "Transinvestgaz” Dmitry Novikov and Igor Kataev, the CEO of OOO "Investment Agency" Intellekt i Pravo". They were accused of abuse of power. The investigator handling the criminal case warned Navalny that the director of the department "Novotek" (oil producer) Alexander Lyadov, the one who had been signing the papers for the passage of oil through intermediary firms, died under mysterious circumstances in the beginning of the investigation.
Source: www.chayka.org from 01.03.2009, www.navalny.livejournal.com, «Vedomosti» № 248 (2518) on 30.12.2009
In 2008, Alexey Navalny filed a lawsuit to force Rosneft to open information about the supply contracts concluded with Gunvor. The Moscow Arbitration Court dismissed the claim, saying that according to the Russian law the company was not required to show its trade relations with Gunvor. After having his claims denied, Navalny was going to sue over the alleged violations of property rights against Rosneft in the European Court of Human Rights. At the same time Representatives of Rosneft argued that shareholders had access to all information required under the Russian law.
Source: www.stockinfocus.ru from 10.03.2010
In January 2009, Alexey Navalny, as a minority shareholder in Rosneft and Transneft, filed a petition in the Federal Arbitration Court of Moscow District for reinstatement of the procedure term for his two claims on obliging the companies to provide information. Earlier, the Arbitration Court and the Ninth Moscow Arbitration Appeal Court dismissed writs by Navalny, which asked to oblige "Rosneft" to provide information on doing business with oil trader Gunvor. Navalny filed similar requirements for transactions to Surgutneftegaz, which also is a minority shareholder. Analysts believe that the actions of Navalny are just a promotion event, as his shares in the companies are negligible for attaining information, which he claims.
Source: "Finance" from 21.01.2009
At the same time, in his claim to "Transneft" Navalny required to disclose information about the company payments to charity in 2007. According to him, the charity costs of the holding were excessive and detrimental to shareholders as they reduce the size of dividends. Upon the request of Alexey Navalny chairman of MDM Bank, an independent director of Transneft, Oleg Vyugin sent a letter to the chairman of the board of Transneft, Sergey Shmatko; he proposed to put on the board of directors the publication of information related to charitable activities, as in 2007 Transneft spent for this purpose 7,2 billion rubles, but did not disclose the names of aid recipients to the shareholders. In 2008, Navalny sued "Transneft" in the Arbitration Court of Moscow, but lost: the company proved that it was not obliged to disclose the recipients of its charity.
Source: www.lenta.ru from 07.10.2009
In 2009, law enforcement inspection of the company "VTB-Leasing" upon the application of Navalny resulted in the following: when drilling rigs were bought, about 160 million went to the accounts of the Cyprus offshore. The inspection resulted in resignation of the director of this company. VTB President Andrey Kostin admitted that the manager had been fired for using illegal schemes.
Source: www.dp.ru from 18.12.2009
On May 7, 2010 Alex Navalny filed a suit in the Moscow Arbitration Court, in which he requested for disclosure of data of Savings Bank on compensation paid to president Dmitry Medvedev and Chairman of the Board of Directors German Gref. According to Navalny, there was a graph in the minutes of the supervisory board in 2009 with rewards of Gref and members of the Supervisory Board, marked as 'Confidential”. Savings Bank had previously reported that in 2009 bonuses of 23,8 million rubles were paid to the members of the Supervisory Board, and the total amount of payments to top managers amounted to 423.6 million rubles. Then they did not report on the way those funds had been distributed among the members of the Supervisory Board.
Source: www.lenta.ru from 12.05. 2010