Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Kirill Kabanov, head of the National Anti-Corruption Committee
On the 24th a meeting took place of all the law-enforcement bodies' representatives on our initiative,
of two working groups and the head of the Committee.
In fact we should correctly separate the story of Sergey Magnitsky in two stages.
We have not made any comment regarding the criminal activity of Magnitsky.
In fact, the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs
has offered to examine materials of the criminal case and we are thankful to it for that.
The question which was stated in the report is the following:
causative-consecutive connection between the remand of Sergey Magnitsky in custody and his death.
The second question is the justification of his remand in custody.
Third, the issue of corruption and conflict of interests, including investigators involved in the case.
We are expanding the number of questions, especially concerning the expert report.
It is not a secret that the Investigation Department
is preparing at the moment in the framework of our cooperation…
At the moment we would like to give a full evaluation so that it becomes clear to us and our legal block
– this gentleman and Mr. Polyakov - and we would like our experts to work with it.
We are rather delighted with the timely reaction of
the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs on our offer to create a working group.
However, we learned only two days ago that every meeting will be held in this fashion,
in the fashion of a briefing.
Thus many colleagues working in our group were not ready, among them Elena Panfilova,
who was not ready for such a format.
I think that we will continue our work in a different format.
When we talk about embezzlement of funds…
We have suggested and we are firm in our suggestions to examine as one single investigation
– for the sake of a test of integrity – all the cases with the participation of Sergey Magnitsky.
I understand that it will be a difficult procedure, since many cases are now returning to the court,
but our position remains firm.
It is necessary for the integrity test,
in order to convince society and us as well that no arguments were lost.
It does not imply that we are calling everyone for to be put in jail.
Regarding putting everyone in jail, by the way.
From the very beginning we have been stating that we want a truthful legal expert opinion.
If already among the presented we understand that some employees of
the Investigative Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and law-enforcement bodies
are not subject to criminal prosecution,
we will simply ask and prepare our draft suggestion regarding administrative liability.
I am convinced that we should not in any way be dependent on a certain international point of view,
especially the point of view of Browder.
We prepared questions based on the study of documents at our disposal, including the specialists' reports.
As a result we have highly-organized cooperation with the Investigation Committee of the Russian Federation.
We will organize similar cooperation with the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
This cooperation will first of all be directed at one story:
the causative-consecutive connection between the remand of Sergey Magnitsky in custody and his death,
a justification of his remand in custody, the use of cliche's by law-enforcement officers
and investigators and the change of this situation to the better.
Pavel Lapsho, head of the administration of the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, colonel of law
The case about the embezzlement of 5.4 billion rubles has been fully investigated.
It is not in the proceedings.
All the participants were established, two were passed criminal charges, four unfortunately died.
Concerning the Magnitsky case, which is in the proceedings of the department, it is ongoing.
However, not in order to collect further evidence and continue the proceedings
but in order to give his close relatives in compliance with the recently
adopted decision of the Constitutional Court a right to the rehabilitation of the convicted.
Concerning Browder, the case against Browder is also in the proceedings.
At the moment he is a citizen of Great Britain, we have identified his location.
But since the extradition is almost impossible, relating to the extraordinary circumstances,
we are considering the possibility of taking the case to court and its consideration by default.
Oleg Silchenko, senior investigator of especially important cases, colonel of law
I was on this case from 2008.
We have conducted a number of investigations and operations,
which allowed us to establish sufficient grounds for suspecting Magnitsky of committing a crime
together with a citizen of Great Britain, William Browder,
as well as grounds for pointing to a number of facts such as pressure applied to witnesses in the case.
Some of them we subjected to the procedure of state defense of witnesses,
since we had reasons to think that their lives were in danger.
At the same time we received reliable data indicating the possibility of absconding
from the law-enforcement bodies and court,
which would have made it difficult to assess the data which was established by
our Department of Investigation and to present people
who committed these actions for a legal assessment to the court,
since only the court can define a person as committing a crime.
Regarding the data indicating his attempt to abscond,
we took into consideration together with other evidence the fact that Browder and Cherkassov
at that point were already on the international wanted list.
As Pavel Vladimirovich has already said, later the location of William Browder
was established and the search for him was stopped.
This was after the events at the center of our discussion.
Nevertheless, Magnitsky himself during interrogation told us that he made photographs for a visa.
These details are in the protocol of his interrogations as a suspect with the participation of his defence.
Magnitsky's defence were very well qualified and there were enough of them.
Investigators did not have enough evidence to put under question the fact
that Magnitsky committed illicit acts, which allowed us to put forward charges against him.
The defence did not give us any material either.
Thus, there were no grounds to put these facts under question.
Moreover, all evidence was presented to the court and it was assessed by several juridical instances.
There are several trial restrictions provided by law.
Being remanded in custody is the most serious pre-trial restriction.
Thus, in the course of certain events there is a certain expediency to maximally limit
the connections of a person, especially with people on an international wanted list.
As I have said before, there were other defenders in this criminal case who were also in custody,
we were working on proving the evidence, making expert reports and conducting interrogations.
After all these materials were presented to the defender of Magnitsky,
evidence which according to investigation pointed to the crime, was collected and passed on to the court.
Relatives were granted a visit, which they made use of.
At the same time, we allowed any phone conversations.
Pavel Lapsho
From the very beginning, from December 29, we knew the cause of his death.
We had forensics done, we brought a copy with us.
There is no doubt that there was no causative-consecutive connection
between the beatings and hardships he went through and the cause of his death.
The cause of his death was acute cardiovascular deficiency.
No doubt, I will not conceal this fact, forensics showed injuries to his legs and hands from handcuffs.
However, the forensic investigation showed that there was no causative-consecutive connection
between these injuries and his death.
Alexander Yagodin, deputy head of the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, colonel of law
The fact that there were beatings was not fully confirmed.
There was a meeting with the committee, the head of which has unfortunately left us.
The investigator of the Investigation Department gave answers to these questions.
Thus we have no materials indicating that there were beatings based on materials of the case
which is at the moment in the Investigation Committee.
As a result of all meetings, including the meeting with the Council of Russian President,
we adopted a decision to establish a working group
with the participation of employees of our Investigation Department.