Platon Lebedev’s statement challenging the investigative team.





On December 27, 2006, in the pre-trial detention-centre of Federal State Penitentiary No. 75/1 in Chita, investigators T.B. Rusanova and V.N. Alyshev informed me that I was a suspect (?!) in criminal case no. 1 18/41-03 - a case trumped up by S. K. Karimov and Y.S. Biryukov, the heads of an anti-constitutional and extremist criminal group - and that I was being investigated for crimes allegedly committed by me (?!) under part 3, article 174-1 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation.

At the same time I, being fully conscious of my own innocence , was given a copy of a decree on the criminal case’s separate standing signed by the heads of the aforementioned criminal group, the senior investigator of the Prosecutor-General’s office, S.K. Karimov, and the Russian Chief Prosecutor’s First Deputy, Y.S. Biryuko, and dated December 2, 2004 - i.e. two years (?!) previously - which contains information that I (as CEO of the international investment holding Group Menatep, acting under the laws of Gibraltar and international law) know to be false , as well as slanderous speculations about alleged ‘legalization’ of ‘stolen funds’(?!) in the form of donations in favor of the public organization Open Russia (?!) via Group Menatep’s accounts.

In connection with the above knowingly false and slanderous speculations of the Biryukov-Karimov criminal group, I should like to state in accordance with the procedure specified in article 76, 187-190 of the Russian Criminal Procedural Code that:

1. Only funds in the form of dividends, and then only from fully-fledged foreign subsidiaries of the holding, were transferred into the accounts of the international investment holding Group Menatep Ltd. Companies named by the Biryukov-Karimov criminal group in its decree of December 2, 2004, such as Fargoil and Nassaubridge Management Ltd., which obviously do not relate to the holding’s subsidiaries, are unknown to me. No funds were or could have been transferred into accounts belonging to the international investment holding Group Menatep Ltd. during the period between Feb. 2, 2002 to June 2, 2003 (the date of my wilfully illegal arrest by the Biryukov-Karimov criminal group with the participation of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation) – and I state this as CEO of the international investment holding in question. The Biryukov- Karimov criminal group does not and cannot have any proofs to the contrary. Proof of the authenticity of my evidence and the deliberate falseness of the trumped-up statements about the Group Menatep Ltd. holding made by Biryukov and Karimov can be found in the Prosecutor-General’s office - to be precise, in the 2002 financial report of the international investment holding Group Menatep Ltd., audited by the internationally-reputable auditing company Ernst & Young (volume 151, personal case 74-89, of criminal case 1 18/58-03 trumped-up by Biryukov-Karimov criminal group).

2. The actions of the Biryukov-Karimov criminal group pursuant to the decree of December 2, 2004, and following from their wilfully false assessment of the activities of the international investment holding Group Menatep Ltd., which was operating outside the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation, have gone beyond the competence and/or jurisdiction of the Russian Prosecutor-General’s office , and are knowingly illegal, in that they have grossly and maliciously violated both Russian legal norms (part 1, article 12 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation), standards of international law, and the international responsibilities of the Russian Federation (under article 17 of the European Convention on Human Rights prohibiting states-participants from abusing rights), and are thus in sum crimes under articles 285, 286 and 292 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation.

3. The activities of the international investment holding Group Menatep Ltd. and of its fully-fledged subsidiaries were checked and controlled (apart from by me) not only by the international auditing company Ernst & Young, but also by international financial and legal institutions UBS Warburg and Clifford Chance, acting as advisors (volume 151, case 68-71),

A) by the holding’s international consultative council - which, apart from myself, consisted of:
• Stuart Eizenstat, former Deputy Secretary of the US Treasury;
• Otto Graf Lambsdorff, Germany’s former Economics Minister;
• Dudley Fishburn, former Conservative MP and executive editor of The Economist;
• Margery Kraus, president and chief executive officer of APCO Worldwide - as well as

B) by all the holding’s international contractors, which included all the internationally-acknowledged financial institutions and auditing and legal firms of Western Europe and the US, every one of them acting in strict observance of standards and principles generally accepted in international business, including FATF requirements.

I personally and repeatedly, furthermore, acted as an advisor to FATF experts and consultants on ‘money laundering’ issues.

In connection with this, the recent crimes of the Biryukov-Karimov group, which is controlled by a cabal made up of Sechin and his ‘relative’ Ustinov, will create a major new global scandal with unpredictable consequences, and will occasion yet more national dishonour.

4. The crimes of the Biryukov-Karimov group, moreover, once more impertinently and cynically betray what would otherwise be described as insanity, in that it falsified legal grounds in the official documents of the criminal proceedings in order to mis-characterize free donations made by the international investment holding Group Menatep Ltd. in various countries of the world, particularly in Russia. The fact is that the regional public organization Open Russia, under Russian criminal law, simply does not come under the purview of article 174.1 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation.

Thus, given the absence of any criminal acts under article 174.1 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation, I ought to have been issued an official apology and the prosecution brought against me should have been shut down on rehabilitative grounds (article 24 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation), with compensation for damages (article 134-146 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation) and the simultaneous initiation of a criminal case against Biryukov and Karimov (if this has not yet been done).

5. During my tenure as CEO of international investment holding Group Menatep Ltd. - i.e. from January 1998 until July 2, 2003 (the date of my wilfully illegal arrest) - the holding and its subsidiaries freely spent around 60 billion rubles (or $2 billion) on various charity and public-social projects in Russia, Western Europe and the US, the relevance and significance of which was determined by me among others.

For the information of the new Chief Prosecutor of the Russian Federation: information to this effect was submitted by me in a statement about the crime dated March 15, 2004 and sent to the now former -Chief Prosecutor of the Russian Federation on March 16, 2004 from penitentiary 77/1 in Moscow. But neither it nor attachments 1.1 and 1.2 to the aforementioned statement about the crime has up to the present time even been considered - as provided for by article 144-145 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation - with the result that Biryukov and Karimov’s crimes have remained concealed.

A) Thus, for instance, during the period (from February 1, 2002 until July 2, 2003) in which the ‘crime’ was supposed to have been committed, Menatep Ltd., a fully-fledged subsidiary of international investment holding Group Menatep Ltd., on December 5, 2002, acting on my instructions, freely transferred $66,628,166.08 (or 2,122,746,720.04 rubles at the prevailing Central Bank rate) to the Federal budget of the Russian Federation as voluntary compensation for the consequences of the 1998 crisis - as was reflected in the report of the government of the Russian Federation of February 1, 2003 (1636 item-Ï13) addressed to the Russian President. The documents reinforcing this were illegally stolen by the Biryukov-Karimov criminal group from my lawyer, A.V. Drel, during a so-called ‘search’ in 2003 of the law-offices of ALM Feldmans, a search that was carried out, under the veil of trumped-up criminal case 1 18/41-03, without a warrant.

That the conduct of the Biryukov-Karimov criminal group was illegal was upheld by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in a ruling dated November 8, 2005 (1 439-Î), which held that ‘the provisions of articles 7, 29 and 182 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation in their constitutional-legal interpretation - an interpretation that follows from valid rulings of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and is in systematic unity with the provisions of para 3, article 8 of the Federal law ‘On Advocacy and the Bar of the Russian Federation’ - do suggest that the conducting of searches in a legal premises or a lawyer’s office can only take place after a specially-authorized court ruling’.

The illegally ‘stolen’ documents are currently held in the Prosecutor General’s office under file.

B) I personally, furthermore, made donations and payments to charity estimated at dozens of millions of rubles - to people who suffered from the 1998 crisis, from apartment-explosions in Moscow and Volgodonsk, and so on - evidence of which was attached to the case during the course of the hearing of the Biryukov-Karimov criminal group’s trumped-up criminal case No. 1 18/58-03, heard in Meshchansky Court by ‘fixed’ judges who legalized (in effect laundered) the criminal acts and decisions of the Biryukov- Karimov criminal group in the interests of the Sechin and Co. cabal.

6. It is necessary to note with particularity the complete absurdity of, and an inherent ‘creative crisis’ in, the understanding and application of criminal-legal norms under Article 174-1 of the Criminal Code of Russia by the Biryukov- Karimov criminal group. In my case, in mendaciously applying this article to their moronic and slanderous suspicions, the ‘insane’ Biryukov and Karimov have in one case ascribed to ‘laundering’ cash assets which were the legal income of the international investment holding Group Menatep Ltd., transferred on a grant basis by companies 100% owned by the holding - and operating outside Russian jurisdiction - which were then given as a charitable endowment to the Russian NGO Open Russia; and in another case have not ascribed to ‘laundering’ cash assets amounting to billions of rubles, also transferred on a grant basis by a company 100% owned by the holding, and also by me personally from income earned from the holding, to the federal and local budgets of the Russian Federation, to Russian organizations, churches, orphanages and individuals etc. Furthermore, no wilfully false ‘suspicions’ of the ‘laundering’ of these gigantic sums have so far been presented to me (!?).

The diagnosis of all this is one and the same - insanity. The intention, too, is one and the same - the embezzlement from Open Russia by the Biryukov-Karimov criminal group of the charitable endowment transferred by GML-Ltd.-owned companies, and ongoing legalization (or ‘laundering’) of its criminal actions and stolen money via the ‘Basmanny-justice’ system. This is not just a crime or a body of crimes under Russian law (article 17 of the Criminal Code), but also a violation of international legal norms (articles 17, 18 and article 1 [on the protection of property] of the Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights). It gives me further reason to turn to the Constitutional Court of Russia and to the European Court of Human Rights.

7. I understand well that after

A) Judges of the Moscow City Court, including its chairperson O.A. Yegorova - though they were the creatures of the Sechin & Co. cabal and ‘empty vessels’ - were forced to admit the unlawfulness of the wilfully false accusations brought against me and Khodorkovsky by the Biryukov-Karimov criminal group with the participation of D.E. Shokhin, playing the part of the prosecution Punch and/or chorus-girl. Accusations under 7 (seven!?) articles of the Russian Criminal Code were ‘legalized’ by Meschansky Court judges I.Y. Kolesnikova, E.A. Maksimova, and E.V. Klinkova in the wicked verdict and sentencing dated 16 May 2005. But they were forced to exculpate us under 5 (five!?) articles of the Russian Criminal Code on rehabilitative grounds, for all their ‘legalization’ of the other false charges.

B) Members of the Club of Madrid –
- Václav Havel - former President of Czechoslovakia and the Czech Republic;
- Fernando Henrique Cardoso - former President of Brazil;
- Mary Robinson - former President of Ireland;
- Vigdís Finnbogadóttir - former President of Iceland;
- Rexhep Meidani - former President of the Republic of Albania;
- Petre Roman - former Prime Minister of Romania;
- Philip Dimitrov - former Prime Minister of Bulgaria;
- Kim Campbell - former Prime Minister of Canada –

in a letter to President Putin dated 15 November 2005 drew his attention, in particular, to a ‘politically-motivated prosecution’ under the ‘facade of a trial for criminal wrongdoing’;

C) The US Senate in Resolution #322, dated November 18, 2005, stated that:

the criminal cases against Mr. Khodorkovsky, Mr. Lebedev and their associates were politically motivated,
and that in cases dealing with perceived political threats to the authorities, the judiciary of Russia was an instrument of the Kremlin and as such not truly independent;

D) The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, in a resolution dated January 25, 2005, noted that

‘the circumstances of the arrest and prosecution of leading Yukos executives suggest that the interest of the state in these cases goes beyond the mere pursuit of criminal justice, and includes elements such as the weakening of an outspoken political opponent, the intimidation of other wealthy individuals and the regaining of control over strategic economic assets’,
and that ‘the circumstances of the sale by auction of Yuganskneftegaz to the Baikal Finance Group and the swift takeover of the latter by state-owned Rosneft raise additional issues related to the protection of property (ECHR, Additional Protocol, Article 1)’. This relates both to the circumstances of the auction itself, which resulted in a price far below fair market-value, and to the way Yukos was forced to sell off its principal asset because of trumped-up tax-reassessments, re-assessments which led to a total tax burden far exceeding that of Yukos’s competitors, and for 2002 even exceeding Yukos’s total revenue for the year.

E) Prime Minister M. Kasyanov and head of the presidential administration A. Voloshin, both of whom, subsequent to my unlawful arrest on July 2, 2003, had strongly criticized the repressive actions initiated by the Sechin & Co. cabal in the Yukos case, were dismissed, followed the dismissal of A. Illarionov, the President’s advisor on economic affairs, who actively objected to the aforementioned actions and publicly called the Yuganskneftegas auction ‘the scam of the year’! Acting minister G. Gref further openly admitted the political motivation behind the Yukos case (NTV, 21 June 2004).

F) The courts of various European countries have consistently denied legal assistance to the Russian Prosecutor General’s office and have refused either to provide documents or to extradite a number of individuals in view of the political motivation behind their prosecution. A ruling, for instance, of the Liechtenstein Supreme Court, dated April 25, 2004, states that ‘not a single circumstance of the case was presented clearly and distinctly. . . The suspicion arises that the request of the Russian government was a “fishing expedition”,In this case, legal assistance is inadmissible and it should be denied’. .

The Biryukov-Karimov criminal group and its accomplices realized the seriousness of my intention to bring them to criminal account for each of more than 500 (five hundred!) instances of crimes against justice and the interests of the state, against the property, freedom, honour and dignity of an individual - including blatant forgery by an official - and for slander and malicious falsification. Each and every crime (under Article 141 of the Russian Criminal Procedural Code) will be brought by me to court, up to and including (if necessary) the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights, to ensure a just punishment for all those involved.

I have no doubt about what decision the European Court of Human Rights will arrive at in my first appeal (#4493/04), which is being examined under priority procedure in accordance with the Rule 41 of Court Rules, considering the fact that the Prosecutor-General’s office and ‘compliant’ courts have blatantly neglected inter alia Constitutional Court judgment #4-P, delivered on March 22, 2005, in my appeal. This judgment is obligatory and has superior legal effect. It proves on all four counts my and my defence-team’s correctness - and consequently the unlawfulness of the actions of both the Prosecutor-General’s office and the courts.

And this is what will happen to my every representation of a crime.

At the same time I regret profoundly that in these proceedings the Russian Federation has not made use of the right to conclude an amicable agreement under Article 1C of the Convention and so avoid further disgrace at the European Court of Human Rights, since, if the same abusive neglect of the Constitution and laws of the Russian Federation, of numerous decisions of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of Russia, and of the provisions of the Convention continue in the future, then Russian representatives will stand no chance in the EU.

8. In view of the facts mentioned above, and of the fact that, after returning to the Prosecutor-General’s office from his ‘exile’ in Bashkiria, ‘investigator’ Karimov has not only failed to distance himself, under the procedure envisaged by article 62, part 1 of the Russian Criminal Procedural Code, from proceedings in fabricated criminal case No. 18/41-03, but has, on the contrary, on December 4, 2006 (i.e. more than two years later!) issued a ruling on taking over the said criminal case No. 18/41-03, thus proving incontrovertibly his direct vested interest in the continuance of the fabrication and falsification of absurd and slanderous new accusations against me, out of revenge and for fear of being brought to criminal responsibility through my pleas, and moreover proving a further interest relating to the political claims of the Sechin & Co. cabal, which has thus far been legalizing Karimov’s crimes; - I challenge S.K. Karimov and all of his investigative group under article 62, part 2 of the Russian Criminal Procedural Code, on the grounds of article 61, part 2 of the said Code.

The fact that Karimov’s investigative group initiated its investigation into criminal case No. 18/41-03 in Chita by trying to acquaint me with rulings on expert witnesses in other criminal cases - Nos. 18/325531-04, 18/325501 (!?) - substantiates once again my demand for demurral and for the opening of a criminal case.

I request that the testimony and information herein given by me be considered in equal measure a plea of a crime in the name of Prosecutor General Y.Y.Chaika, by virtue of the provisions of Chapter 52 of the Criminal Procedural Code of Russia.



January 18, 2007