Presenter: The guest in the studio is Robert Amsterdam, Mikhail Khodorkovsky's lawyer. We are discussing the hearing of an appeal filed by Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Platon Lebedev's defence against the guilty verdict passed by Meshchansky Court. My first question is about something that [Khodorkovsky's] foreign lawyers said not a long time ago: that the verdict will simply be rubber-stamped. Could you please comment on that?

Amsterdam : Well, the question is not whether they will rubber-stamp it but whether they will leave and let the ink dry. They are desperate to speed the process up to curtail any possibility of Mr Khodorkovsky running for the Duma. The time limits given for this appeal are absurd. They are near unprecedented in the speed with which they are attempting to push through the cassational appeal and defeat any possibility that the documentation for the Duma might even be filed.

Presenter: Do you think the efforts that you are making will yield any results?

Amsterdam : Well, I certainly believe that it is necessary to document not only the Khodorkovsky case itself but what it represents about the new system of power in Russia. This is a government fighting against its own people and fighting against the truth and that needs to be understood in the West. The West needs to understand that the media is being destroyed, business people are being destroyed, the system of elections is being destroyed and now young men are being put in an organization called the Nashi [Russ: ours] which should not be seen as Ours in Russia: it should be seen as Theirs and by this I mean the Kremlin.

Presenter: So, a recess has been announced. The question of who will be able to represent Mikhail Khodorkovsky's interests is being discussed. How do you think the situation will develop further?

Amsterdam : I believe that essentially the cassational court will move with continued haste to try to bring this matter to conclusion. They will push for the shortest possible time, as I said. Starting off with a date that was far too early makes it clear what the final decision will be.

Presenter: So, the cassation appeal will be rejected. What can be done next? What are the subsequent options?

Amsterdam : There are a series of them. Certainly, we are prepared for [the European Court of Human Rights in] Strasbourg. Then again there is also the possibility of [Russian] Supreme Court intervention that can be explored.

And, lastly, the issues that bring us here, the political issues, must be continued to be brought out. This is a political case and it is very important in a political case not only to appeal within the court but to appeal politically.

Putin regime "has a shelf life"

Presenter: But how can you act on the political plane while you are a foreign lawyer of Mikhail Khodorkovsky?

Amsterdam : The political plane is not just domestic, it is international. The attack on Yukos and on Khodorkovsky is destroying the legitimacy of this government in Russia. The [Dec 04] auction of [Yukos’ main production asset] Yuganskneftegaz has become iconographic in terms of the destruction of the rule of law in Russia.

The German-Russian energy relationship has become a caricature of what true international relations should be. Let us be clear that the Schroeder-Putin relationship is not democratic. It is without oversight in both countries. And it [words indistinct] of itself particularly exemplified by Mr Putin's visit during the end of an election campaign [8 Sept] demonstrates the impunity Mr Putin believes he has.

Presenter : Imagine there is a certain verdict by the Strasbourg court. But does it have a legal force in Russia? It can be easily ignored, can't it?

Amsterdam : Believe me, I think there are no limits to what Russia can do. The [exiled tycoon Vladimir] Gusinsky verdict from Strasbourg virtually condemned Russia as engaging in state extortion. But the decisions of Strasbourg and in fact the European Convention of Human Rights is binding Russian law. It is not only the law of Strasbourg, it is the law of Russia.

Presenter: Can you say that what is happening around the Khodorkovsky-Lebedev trial is pure arbitrariness on the part of the authorities? That it has nothing to do with the law?

Amsterdam : Yes.

Presenter: Then what do you do in this situation?

Amsterdam : You are forced to attempt to demonstrate in every opportunity one obtains, including this one, to demonstrate to the populace, to demonstrate internationally that these violations of the rule of law cannot continue. It is important to understand that these types of political regimes which clearly fear their own people and lack legitimacy have a shelf life.

Presenter : Could you tell me please what results do you expect from the Monday [19 September] session? What are your expectations? What is the worst case scenario? What is the best case scenario? I am asking about Monday only.

Amsterdam : I will tell you that this court, like the first instance court, is not bound by the law. The timing demonstrates that. There is procedural breach after procedural breach involved in this case at the cassation level already. And it would be foolish for me to speculate on what the cassational court will do because there are no markers by which to guide us. That is the essence of a political case. That is why in the first instance there were literally hundreds of procedural violations. That's why our experts weren't allowed to be heard. That's why witnesses were intimidated. That's why the bias of the court was not explored. And again, we can just go on and on.



Khodorkovsky is political prisoner

Presenter: But Robert Amsterdam is not a public figure. You are a professional lawyer. And the situation when you are constantly speaking about the state's unjust and unlawful actions, you - representing the law - are like a man with a sword who is confronting another man who has a grenade-launcher. Do you know what to do, even if you are not prepared to tell us the details? Do you or do you not?

Amsterdam : I think that since the last 50 years international law has changed dramatically. The law of human rights that has developed in the last 50 years provides for explicitly this type of situation. The individual is allowed to take on the state when the state breaches the law. I have done it and continue to do it in Latin America and in other difficult areas. And Russia, unfortunately, is now one of them. One does not have to be a public figure in order to attempt to uphold the rule of law. When there is an abuse of power, as in this case, it is necessary to shine a light on that abuse. When there are opportunistic policies pursued by individuals such as Schroeder, they need to be called to account. That is in many ways the essence of democratic action.

Presenter: Do you believe that if Mr Schroeder adhered to a different position, Mikhail Khodorkovsky's situation would have been better?

Amsterdam : Yes. I also believe that the free pass given by the war on terror as it's interpreted here has led to a tremendous amount of abuse and impunity.

Presenter: Do you consider Mikhail Khodorkovsky a political prisoner?

Amsterdam : Absolutely.

Presenter: In Soviet times there were precedents when human rights activists and dissidents were exchanged, for example Vladimir Bukovsky was exchanged for Louis Corvalan [in 1976]. Do you think such a thing could be possible?

Amsterdam : He is clearly a political prisoner and whether there could be an exchange in the future or something like that is beyond my ability to speculate. But this is a country where he is not alone. This is a country where the power ministries are constantly seeking to escalate a state of emergency. We have the spy cases here. We've just finished the case involving the arts show [trial of organizers of the Beware Religion exhibition at the Sakharov Centre in Moscow]. This type of government needs these types of political issues to keep people mobilized and atomized.

Presenter: You have stressed several times the political aspect of the case. At the same time in an interview for the Zavtra newspaper, Mikhail Khodorkovsky said that he considers the case an economic and not a political one.

Amsterdam : Well, there are two things to say. One, I agree with him that the case has a very strong economic base. But at the same time we have to be very careful as to how we read these articles that are taken out of jail. I would be very surprised if Mr Khodorkovsky would not view this as political as well.



Situation in Russian prisons "critical"

Presenter: The article "Left Turn" [in Vedomosti on 1 Aug], after which Khodorkovsky was moved to a common cell, then the situation with the election and the subsequent move of Platon Lebedev to an isolation ward and Mikhail Khodorkovsky's hunger strike - what is your reaction to these events?

Amsterdam: I can only say that without the rule of law not only in the courts but in the prisons and with this horrific situation with Lebedev's health and with not only Khodorkovsky's hunger strike but the hunger strike at Matrosskaya Tishina by all of the prisoners, we have a situation in the prisons in Russia which is critical and in need of investigation. The authorities cannot simply bury people by putting them in prison. And the abuses in the prison population in Russia must be addressed both internationally and domestically. We are in the middle of an explosion of self-mutilation throughout prison camps in Russia. This needs to be understood by the people. The Khodorkovsky case and these examples that you cite simply demonstrate how important it is for people in Russia to understand that this case is emblematic of an entire system that is being foisted upon the people and they need to understand that and react to it.

Presenter: The guest in the studio was Robert Amsterdam, Mikhail Khodorkovsky's lawyer. Thank you.

Amsterdam : Thank you.

(Ekho Moskvy)