Hearings into the appeals filed by Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s lawyers continued today, albeit a bit late due to lawyer Anton Drel’s delayed arrival. Lawyers Elena Levina and Denis Dyatlev were also present at the proceedings. All three lawyers filed a request to be excused from representing Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Judge Vyacheslav Tarasov granted their request after which the court initiated a discussion of who would represent Mikhail Khodorkovsky at this appeal.

The court revealed that it had obtained information that defence lawyer Genrikh Padva had received the results of the biopsy and would be released from the hospital on Wednesday, September 21. The court also shared that Yuri Schmidt had informed the court that he would be available to appear in court as early as September 22.

Lead prosecutor Dmitry Shokhin protested delaying the proceedings until September 22 and insisted the proceedings continue today. In his opinion, “This is a clear attempt [by the defence] to undermine the progress of the proceedings.” Mr. Shokhin then presented a document issued by the Russian Border Control Service that shows Yuri Schmidt left Russia for Copenhagen, Denmark on September 6. The document also noted that there is no information on Mr. Schmidt’s return travels. It was unclear with what purpose in mind did the prosecutor present this document to the court other than to illustrate that they had no confirmation of when Mr. Schmidt planned to return to Russia.

Mikhail Khodorkovsky pre-empted this question from the court by saying, “I do not know where Yuri Schmidt is at this moment. However, he reassured me that he was prepared to agree to participate in the appeal process beginning September 22.”

Following a short recess, the panel of judges, led by Judge Tarasov, announced the court was adjourned until Thursday, September 22 at 10:00 am. The judge added that, due to the contradictory nature of information presented by both the prosecution and Mikhail Khodorkovsky regarding the current status of Messrs. Padva and Schmidt, the court would provide a public defender for the appellant.