Supporters of the oil tycoon are hailing Gref’s testimony as a major point in their favor, however, as the former government minister stated that not only were Khodorkovsky’s actions perfectly legal, but that the gas theft the government is accusing him of could not have happened without his awareness.

The Associated Press reports:

Imprisoned tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky received a boost in his embezzlement trial on Monday when a former government minister told a Moscow court that the masssive theft the magnate is charged with could not have taken place without official knowledge.

Once Russia’s richest man, Khodorkovsky has already served six years of an eight-year sentence for tax evasion. As his release date approached last year, prosecutors hit him with the new charges of embezzling of $25 billion in petroleum products. If convicted, the 46-year-old Khodorkovsky faces up to 22 more years in prison.

The three hours of testimony by German Gref, who was minister of economic development when the crackdown against Khodorkovsky began in 2003, may not sway Russia’s notoriously weak court system. But they showed that some of Russia’s top insiders are prepared to take the stand in defense of the embattled oligarch.

“Checking on such matters was not part of my job, other agencies exist for that … However, if embezzlement had been discovered, I would have been made aware of it,” said Gref, a liberal economist who is currently chairman of Sberbank, Russia’s largest bank.

Outside the courtroom, Khodorkovsky’s lawyers described Gref’s statement as a major victory.

“It shows that at the time when this oil was allegedly being stolen, the government did not know it. So for prosecutors to claim now, many years later, that this oil was then being embezzled looks all the more unreasonable,” defense lawyer Konstantin Rifkin told The Associated Press.

Monday’s hearing was unusual in that the court allowed Khodorkovsky to question Gref, who was deputy head of the State Property Ministry when Khodorkovsky took control of the Yukos oil corporation.

Through the small window in the defendant’s cage, Khodorkovsky, who has served most of his sentence in a Siberian prison, stuck to a technical line of questioning, appearing nervous at the chance to interrogate a man so close to his perceived enemies in the government.

Gref drew snickers from the court audience when he was unable to answer whether he sat on the board of a state pipeline company, but he admitted that it was perfectly legal for Yukos to buy oil at steep discounts from its subsidiaries — one of the methods the prosecution is claiming that Khodorkovsky used to embezzle the oil.

The new trial is becoming a who’s who in Russian politics. Last month former Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov testified on behalf of Khodorkovsky — calling prosecutors’ charges “absurd” — and on Tuesday former energy minister Viktor Khristenko is scheduled to take the stand.

Khodorkovsky’s lawyers have tried to call Prime Minister Vladimir Putin as a witness in the case, as well as numerous other officials who have direct knowledge of the state’s campaign to dismantle Yukos.

For more coverage from the Other Russia on Mikhail Khodorkovsky and the second Yukos case:

• Khodorkovsky’s Hunger Strike Puts Spotlight on Medvedev
• Khodorkovsky Calls Putin to Court
• Former Russian PM Reveals Putin’s Campaign Against Tycoon

From the Moscow Times:

Kasyanov told the Khamovnichesky District Court that the changes were politically motivated and contradicted the everyday practices of oil companies.

“By the end of 2003, I had a clear understanding that both were arrested under political motives,” he said.

Kasyanov said he tried to talk with Putin after Lebedev was arrested in July 2003 and Khodorkovsky was arrested in October that year, but Putin refused to discuss the issue with him. Only on the third try did Putin reply, he said.

“I asked Putin to clarify what he knew about the situation, but he refused twice, and then he gave me an answer,” Kasyanov said.

“He said Yukos financed Yabloko and the Union of Right Forces, political parties that it was allowed to finance, but also the Communist Party, which it wasn’t allowed to.”

Khodorkovsky and his lawyers have been trying for months to convince the court to call the prime minister as a witness. Until Monday, it had dismissed this possibility as “premature,” despite a series of questions penned by Khodorkovsky that only Vladimir Putin would be able to properly address.

After Kasyanov’s testimony, the idea that such a subpoena would be premature made even less sense than before. Therefore, lawyers for the defense requested once again that the court call in Prime Minister Putin, as well as Russian Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin, arguing that new circumstances had come to light that made their interrogations necessary for the case.

On Thursday, however, the court turned down the lawyers’ request. Judge Viktor Danilkin had said previously that he “did not find any legal basis” for the subpoenas, and now said that the new arguments by the defense left no different impression. The prime minister and finance minister would be interrogated only if they personally appeared in court, he said.

Prosecutor Vyacheslav Smirnov, meanwhile, made it clear that there would be no interrogation of the prime minister in the Khamovnichesky Court, period. When journalists asked him why, Smirnov responded: “Because we live on the ground.”

The ex-CEO of former oil giant Yukos announced his hunger strike in a letter to Russian Supreme Court Chairman Vyacheslav Lebedev; his lawyers published its content on their website Tuesday morning. The letter outlines how a Moscow court ruling to detain Khodorkovsky and his co-defendant, Platon Lebedev, for another three months violates a procedural amendment introduced last month by Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. The two are currently on trial facing charges from the Russian government of embezzlement that they dismiss as obviously untrue and politically motivated.

“The Khamovnichesky Court, by ruling on May 14, 2010, to extend my arrest, blatantly disregarded the changes recently incorporated into article 108 of the Criminal Procedure Code [UPK] of the Russian Federation,” says the letter. The changes referred to allow those charged with economic crimes to be released on bail except for under a limited number of circumstances: if their identity cannot be established, if they lack a place of residence in Russia, or if they have attempted to flee the country or hide from investigators. None of these circumstances apply to Khodorkovsky or Lebedev, who have been sitting out their 8-year prison terms in Siberia since 2005 as the result of a fraud case that was also widely viewed as politically motivated. Their lawyers had reminded the court of these amendments, which were introduced in response to the scandalous death of lawyer Sergei Magnitsky in pretrial detention last November, before the verdict was reached on Friday.

Nevertheless, Khodorkovsky goes on, “the court did not even consider it necessary to explain the reason for not adhering to the law.” Moreover, he said that he knew of other cases where the new amendments had been similarly disregarded. He stressed that while he the ruling had little effect on his own situation, his hunger strike was geared towards protesting the precedent that it would set.

“I can’t agree to something where the creation of a precedent in such a high-profile case would go unnoticed by the country’s administration, since it will immediately be replicated by corrupt bureaucrats in hundreds of other, less high-profile cases,” explained the former Yukos CEO.

Khodorkovsky said he wants “President Medvedev to know exactly how the law that was adopted altogether a month ago by his initiative… is being put to use, or, more accurately, is being sabotaged.” Therefore, he intends to strike until he gets confirmation that the president has received “exhaustive information” on the precedent being set by the Khamovnichesky Court in failing to adhere to existing law.

Supreme Court Chairman Vyacheslav Lebedev said that he has received Khodorkovsky’s letter and promised to look into the allegations and provide a response. Sources in Russia’s Federal Penitentiary Service told RIA Novosti that they would be keeping track of Khodorkovsky’s health, but issued no official comment. President Medvedev has so far given no response.

Vadim Klyuvgant, a lawyer for Khodorkovsky and Lebedev, reiterated his client’s sentiment that the Khamovnichesky Court ruling is a “sign of catastrophe” that “is not so bad for our clients as it is for the entire country and for its president.”

“Because if such sabotage is possible in a situation when the people wouldn’t be released anyway, then what can we expect or say in regards to any other person who could and should have been released as a result of this law?” said Klyuvgant.

In comments obtained by the Christian Science Monitor, political analyst Andrei Piontkovsky explained how Khodorkovsky’s decision “is a direct challenge to Medvedev to separate himself from the Putin era and enforce the laws that he himself has sponsored.” As Piontkovsky elaborated:

“Khodorkovsky is making it necessary for Medvedev to define his position,” says Andrei Piontkovsky, director of the independent Institute for Strategic Studies in Moscow. “His challenge is very clever, legally and politically. He isn’t demanding that he be freed, rather just for confirmation that Medvedev has been made aware of his case. . . The ball is now in Medvedev’s court. Will he choose to follow the logic of the law, and risk a damaging split with Putin? He will have to make a choice, and that could determine Medvedev’s own political future.”

Additional reading:
• Who Fears a Free Mikhail Khodorkovsky? – NY Times Magazine

The announcement from the prosecution came as a surprise since, aside from the fact that the case had become seemingly endless, Prosecutor Gyulchekhra Ibragimova had previously told presiding Judge Viktor Danilkin that “maybe, yes,” there would be more witnesses on Monday. Even after the revised announcement, however, Prosecutor Valery Lakhtin stipulated that they maintain the right to call more witnesses at a later point in time. “This is an inalienable right of both the defense and the prosecution,” he said.

Khodorkovsky and Lebedev were both convicted on controversial charges of fraud in 2005, and have been sitting in prison ever since. In the current case, the two are charged with embezzling all of the oil produced by Yukos between 1998 and 2003 and profiting from its sale. Since the beginning of court hearings on March 9, 2009, prosecutors read out chosen passages at length from the hefty 188-volume case, not calling their first witness until the end of September. But neither that witness nor any of the proceeding 50 others testified to having any knowledge that any oil had been stolen at all.

The defense, meanwhile, has a list of 250 witnesses that it would like to call to court. Chiefly among them is Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who is widely believed to have personally ordered the original case against Khodorkovsky. In an interview earlier this month with the British newspaper The Independent, the former Yukos CEO issued a series of questions that he wants Putin to answer under oath. Regardless of what witnesses the defense ends up successfully bringing to court, Khodorkovsky is expected to testify first. Lebedev, in his turn, has said that he will be the last.

Compiled from reports by Gazeta.ru.

Khodorkovsky, known as an oligarch who was once Russia’s richest man, is currently facing new charges in a second criminal case against Yukos. He and co-defendant Platon Lebedev are accused by the Russian government of embezzling oil products in the sum of $27.5 billion, a charge the defense says is absurd and refuted by obvious, undisputed facts. Khodorkovsky’s lawyers are now planning to call on the prime minister, who is widely believed to have personally ordered Khodorkovsky’s arrest, as a witness in the case.

“Your prosecutors claim I ran Yukos not as an official chairman, but as the leader of an organized criminal group,” Khodorkovsky asks Putin. “When you discussed Yukos’s problems with me, with whom did you think you were talking?”

“Your prosecutors accuse me of stealing Yukos’ production from 1998 to 2003. When you, in 2003, personally congratulated Yukos for its successes in commercial and social activities, is this what you were referring to?” he goes on.

Responding through his lawyers, Khodorkovsky told the Independent that he believes Russian President Dmitri Medvedev to be sincere in his stated desire to fight corruption, as well as to reform the country’s law enforcement agencies and judicial system. “But reasonably soon, the president’s actions will bring him to a boundary, after which specific changes will not be possible without modernizing the political system as a whole,” he stipulated. Khodorkovsky added that whether or not Medvedev can successfully implement such modernization remains unclear.

During the interview, the imprisoned oligarch categorically denied rumors that he had been offered release under condition of leaving the country or staying out of politics.

Despite all talk of corruption, Khodorkovsky said that he does not believe the outcome of the current case against him to have been predetermined. “But whatever happens, I am going to defend my position and my innocence,” he said. Asked whether he was prepared to spend another twenty years behind bars in the case that he is found guilty and handed a maximum sentence, Khodorkovsky asserted that he doesn’t plan to despair.

Putin’s press secretary, Dmitri Peskov, told the newspaper Vedomosti that the prime minister would be informed about the letter but was unlikely to read it, let alone answer it. He added that Putin usually does not enter into dialogue with convicts.

For the Independent article in its entirety, click here.

Friday’s decision makes Russia the last and final member of the Council of Europe to sign the protocol, opening the way for the court to adopt a series of much-needed reforms.

Russian legislators initially refused to sign the protocol in December 2006, saying that the reforms would infringe upon Russian interests.

Specifically, the protocol would provide for a committee of three judges to decide whether or not to consider a complaint that had been filed in the court. Russian deputies also objected to a provision allowing the court to further investigate a complaint before it decided whether or not to take it under consideration.

Statements earlier in the week by State Duma Speaker Boris Gryzlov met with initial skepticism, with analysts fearing that the rhetoric echoed similar statements by Duma deputies that had previously gone unfulfilled.

The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg has handed down a vast number of rulings against Russia for rights abuses. It has ruled against Russia more than 120 times in cases related to Chechnya alone. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has accused the court of making “politicized” decisions.

According to the RFE/RL news service, the Duma’s decision to finally ratify the protocol is likely political. In particular, a pending $98 billion case from the former oil company Yukos against Russia that accuses the country of driving it into bankruptcy through unfair prosecution is a likely factor.

“The consideration of the Yukos case has been postponed for months on various pretexts. Now that all the possibilities of delays have run out, the ratification lever is being used,” says Russian political analyst Nikolai Petrov. “The Kremlin is interested in mollifying the European Court as much as possible by improving Russia’s image with the judges.”

During the highly choreographed production, the prime minister told the country not to hold its breath for his departure from politics, expressed interest in running for president again in 2012, accused jailed Yukos CEO Mikhail Khodorkovsky of murder, blamed the United States for preventing Russia’s inception into the World Trade Organization, and expounded upon the subtleties of understanding Stalin, among other things.

The Crisis

Even before Putin began to speak, host Maria Sittel took the floor and exalted the government for its handling of the economic crisis. “We all know perfectly well how the year of the crisis began: millions of Russian citizens feared poverty; tens of thousands expected to be fired; business calculated future losses,” she said. But instead of throwing its citizens to the “mercy of fate,” she continued, the government “laboriously, step by step…scrutinized the affairs of individual companies, made agreements with businesses, and helped our national manufacturers.”

Putin himself turned out to be pleased with his work on the crisis. He assured viewers that “the peak of the crisis has been overcome,” although “turbulent phenomena in the world economy, and consequently also in Russia, do remain.”

Despite a nearly 9 percent fall in GDP, a 13 percent fall in industry, and growing inflation, Putin listed a 0.5 percent growth in agriculture and a rising birth rate as commendable compared to the government response to the economic crisis in 1998.

Putin on Terrorism

In the wake of last week’s bombing of the Nevsky Express luxury train, which authorities are calling a terrorist attack, Putin addressed the problem of terrorism in Russia on the whole. “We’ve done a lot to ‘break the spine’ of terrorism, but the menace has not yet been eliminated.”

“It raises the question,” he said, “can we prevent crimes of this type? Our country is enormous, our territory is large, and there is a lot of infrastructure. Nevertheless, we need to work effectively. We need to be on the advance.”

Putin Saves Pikalevo, Again

Among sites chosen to host camera teams to field questions live to the prime minister was Pikalevo, one of Russia’s so-called “mono-towns” dependent on a sole industry – in this case, aluminum. The majority of the town’s 21,000 residents lost their jobs when all three plants were shut down last winter, and the city shut off all heat and hot water in May. A massive protest erupted when the long-unpaid citizens blocked off a nearby federal highway and demanded Putin’s personal intervention. The Prime Minister responded with an embarrassing public chastisement of Oleg Deripaska, the oligarch owner of the largest of the three plants, and ordered him to negotiate a decision that would reopen the factories.

During the broadcast, a manager of the largest of the plants asked the prime minister whether he would return to the town. The reason that this might be necessary, he said, was that the promised negotiations had not yet been signed.

In response, Putin promised that he would travel to any place in Russia where he was needed. “If the situation demands it, I will go to you again, or to any other place at any different point in the Russian Federation – that is my duty,” That aside, Putin said he currently saw “no such necessity.” He promised, however, that the government had control of the situation and an agreement would soon be written.

Indeed, even before the end of the broadcast, reports came in that the agreement between Pikalevo and the company had been signed.

The United States and the WTO

At one point, host Ernest Matskyavichyus told the audience that many questions had come in regarding Russia’s inception into the WTO. In response, Putin abruptly pounced on the United States, blaming it for not annulling the Jackson-Vanik amendment, a piece of Cold War-era legislation intended to help Soviet dissidents and religious minorities emigrate to America. Russia now criticizes the amendment as anachronistic and harmful for trade relations.

Putin said the amendment is used by “representatives of various lobbies in the United States Congress” for “decisions of rather narrow and selfish sectoral economic problems.”

“Entry into the WTO remains our strategic goal, but we get the impression that, due to motives that we are aware of, several countries – including the United States – are hindering our entry into the WTO,” he concluded rather sharply.

Love for Belarus

One question focused on recent angry remarks that the totalitarian Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko had aimed at Putin. “You were harshly criticized by Belarusian President Lukashenko. You don’t answer him. Why?” a viewer asked.

“Maybe it’s love?” Putin replied.

The prime minister added that he has very kind, warm feelings for the Belarusian people, and especially for its government. The Russian government, he said, imports nearly all Belarusian agricultural products and has given the country 3.5 billion dollars over the past two years.

Putin Clarifies his Relationship with Tymoshenko

The prime minister’s position on upcoming presidential elections in Ukraine turned out to be less ambiguous than four years ago, when the Kremlin supported Viktor Yanukovych.

“Why do you support Yulia Tymoshenko in the presidential elections in Ukraine?” one viewer asked.

“I do not support Yulia Tymoshenko in the presidential elections in Ukraine,” Putin replied. “I am cooperating with Yulia Vladimirovna Tymoshenko as the prime minister of the Ukrainian government,” stressing his role as a “humble servant” while also misstating his Ukrainian counterpart’s patronymic (which is actually Volodymyrivna).

Recent agreements concerning Russia’s sale to Ukraine of natural gas have raised speculation that the Kremlin would back Tymoshenko in the upcoming Ukrainian elections.

The Police

A recent slew of high-profile incidents has brought a renewed wave of criticism on Russia’s police forces, and one of the key questions in Thursday’s broadcast reflected this concern.

“The police are now out of favor, and every day there are reports of police attacks on citizens…Maybe, [we should] just dissolve them and create a police force from scratch?”

Putin began his response by saying that no police reform would occur in Russia as has occurred in Georgia and Ukraine.

“In Ukraine, our neighbors and friends have already had this experience. They dissolved what we call the GAI, the road services – nothing good came from this. Bribes increased, and there came to be less order on the roads,” elaborating no further on the situation in Georgia.

In general, Putin said, the police should not be excessively slandered. “I consider it unnecessary to smear all police officers with red paint,” he said, but noted that the reaction to police offenses should be “especially critical, fast, and severe.”

Media attention to problems with the police, which have long plagued Russia, was renewed in April when police chief Denis Yevsyukov killed three people and wounded six in a Moscow supermarket while drunk. Novorossiysky Major Aleksei Dymovsky drew unprecedented media attention in November when he posted two YouTube videos of himself discussing corruption that he had seen in the police force.

Khodorkovsky and Murder

For the first time since the 2005 arrest of oligarch and former Yukos CEO Mikhail Khodorkovsky, Putin allowed himself to comment on the controversial case. Khodorkovsky’s trial, in which he was sentenced to eight years in prison for oil embezzlement in the sum of 900 billion rubles (approx. $31 billion), is criticized as highly flawed and politically motivated. Until Thursday, no questions on the subject had been posed during a live broadcast.

“When will Khodorkovsky be released?” a viewer asked via text message.

“This well-known figure is in prison by the sentencing of the court. And the problem is not when he will be released,” Putin stressed, “but so that crimes of this type are never repeated among us,” referring to economic crimes.

The prime minister went on to say that the money resulting from the case went a housing and communal services reform fund that has helped 10 million Russian citizens. “If at some point this money was stolen from the people, it needs to be returned to those same people,” he asserted.

In an unexpected additionally commentary, Putin went on to accuse Khodorkovsky of murder.

Referring to chief Yukos security official Alexey Pichugin, currently serving a life sentence for conspiracy in several murders, Putin remarked that “nobody remembers, unfortunately, that one of the leaders of the security services of the Yukos company is in prison. What, you think that he acted on his own discretion, at his own peril and risk? He had no concrete interests. He is not the main shareholder in the company. It is clear that he acted in the interests and by the instructions of his bosses,” implying that Khodorkovsky had ordered the murders.

Putin for President, Again

Two questions were posed in regards to speculation that Putin might run for a third term as president in 2012.

“Don’t you feel like leaving politics with all its problems and live for yourself, your children, your family, and finally rest?” one viewer asked. “If that’s it, I’ll take your place, just give me a call.”

“Don’t hold your breath,” the prime minister replied.

The second question was from a St. Petersburg student, who directly asked whether Putin was planning to participate in the 2012 presidential elections.

“I’ll think about it,” replied Putin. “There’s plenty of time.”

Approximately an hour after this statement, an Italian reporter asked Russian President Dmitri Medvedev whether it was possible that both he and Putin would run for president in 2012.

“Prime Minister Putin said that he isn’t ruling out this possibility, and I’m also not ruling out this possibility,” replied Medvedev, who was at a press conference in Rome with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.

“We can agree in what way not to elbow each other, and make a rational decision for our country,” he asserted.

Putin and Stalin

At the end of the program, Putin answered a number of questions that he said he had chosen himself. One of these turned out to concern Stalin.

“Do you consider the activities of Stalin on the whole to be positive or negative?” the question asked.

Saying that he understood the “subtlety” of the question, Putin qualified his answer by saying that there were both positive and negative qualities to the dictator’s reign. “One cannot, in my view, make a judgment on the whole,” said Putin. He praised Stalin for successfully changing the country’s focus from agriculture to industry, and said that victory in World War II was Stalin’s achievement.

At the same time, he continued, these positives “were nevertheless reached at an unacceptable price.”

Putin called Stalin’s repressions, which killed an estimated 30 million people, “a fact,” saying that “millions of our fellow citizens suffered from them. Such a means of managing the government to achieve a result is not acceptable.”

“Here, Thank God, There Aren’t Any Elections”

Putin’s most significant slip of the tongue came the prime minister was asked whether his recent appearance in the hip-hop contest “Battle for Respect” was motivated by his falling ratings.

“Ratings have absolutely nothing to do with it. Here, thank God, there aren’t any elections,” he responded.

Elections in Russia are notoriously fraudulent. Regional elections on October 11 delivered sweeping wins for Putin’s leading United Russia party across Russia, continuing the political monopoly it has held since its conception in 2001. Observers noted massive electoral violations, including ballot stuffing and multiple voting with the same absentee ballot, much of which has been statistically documented. Medvedev himself has admitted that the elections were flawed and chastised United Russia for “backwardness.”

Compiled from reports by Gazeta.ru.

Some of Russia’s leading human rights experts and commentators spoke about the significance of the event (below).  Their commentary first appeared in the Yezhednevny Zhurnal and Grani.ru online newspapers.

Viktor Shenderovich, writer:

Thank God that this happened.  But then comes the question – what are we measuring against?  If we measure against the norms of a civilized European country, then this happened with terrible red tape, after torturous efforts from the public, with a great deafness on the part of authorities, and so forth.  If we measure against Uzbekistan or something along those lines, or even the recent unipolar-Putinist times, when absolutely no one was pardoned and no one was released… then this can be seen as progress.  The glass is either half full or half empty.  I, perhaps, will consider it half full.  It’s better this way.

Lev Ponomarev, chair of the For Human Rights movement:

Many readers of Yezhednevny Zhurnal will probably see this as a momentous event.  Others will express great skepticism.  This discussion is taking place: what is happening in the country, “who is mister Medvedev,” and so forth.  Of course, this event will propel this discussion to a new thread, and there’s no arguing that this is a a significant event.  But before all else, this is joy with teary eyes, because we won’t forget what happened around Bakhmina.

I’d like to remind you of one moment which remains particularly clear in this whole history with Bakhmina – when Bakhmina, pregnant and in her seventh month, withdrew her request for pardon.  At the time it was completely evident, that a women in such a condition could only withdraw a pardon request under strong pressure from the system.  We bore witness to the bared teeth of the regime, and the most brutal regime at that.

It was evident that in the end they would free her, after she had a successful birth.  But aside from that, I’d like to reiterate, that the judge, in reading the decision, said that the court took into account the fact that she admitted her guilt and expressed remorse.

We don’t know yet whether the system has finally released her or not.  We don’t know what role is foreseen for her in the trial against Khodorkovsky and Lebedev.  We’ll see, and we’ll be watching.  I’m not certain that the system has finally released her from its embrace.  Which is why we must also rejoice with caution.  It seems to me that it’s early to be making any sort of far-reaching conclusions.

Valentina Melnikova, chair of the Committee of Soldiers’ Mothers:

Thank God, although I didn’t expect this.  Last year, no one was released.  Evidently, Sveta Sorokina needed to go to Medvedev, in order for the court to issue such a ruling.  In general this isn’t normal, that people aren’t released on parole.  There have never been as many people in the women’s prisons as now, all of them are overflowing, the women are held in inhumane conditions.

We didn’t collect signatures for naught, despite everything, by any means necessary.  Everything is very slow in our country.  And after this case, who knows, maybe they’ll start releasing people.  There was a parliamentary hearing recently in the Public Chamber devoted to public control over prisons.  We turned to representatives from the Prosecutor General’s Office, to representatives from the Supreme Court: what is it, guys, do you have an order not to release anyone?  They said: no, of course not… Imprisoning people for economic crimes, whether men or women, is simply idiocy..  This isn’t murder, not robbery.  I am very happy for Svetlana, our joint efforts had an effect after all.

Grigory Chkhartishvili (Boris Akunin), writer:

I am incredibly happy.  I don’t even feel like grumbling: why didn’t they do this sooner, why did they drag it on and on for so long.  Thank you for releasing Svetlana Bakhmina, and even for free, not for two million, like [Vasily] Aleksanyan.  Maybe the late spring is truly starting?  I very much wish it were true.

Stanislav Belkovsky, publicist:

This decision was pretty-much expected.  On the political level, it was made several months ago.  It is another matter that since it was postponed several times, few believed in it.  I’m not speaking, of course, about any kind of deal between Bakhmina and prosecutors.  Dmitry Medvedev has shown that he is prepared to allow the release of certain people and become involved in high-profile cases, but only through the mechanisms of the court – Bakhmina’s pardon appeal was ignored by the president.  With this he has shown the nature and style of his policy in relation to high-profile cases.  I think it is possible that he will continue to become involved in the cases of famous prisoners, but in a way that it won’t be evident, so there won’t be proof of this type of involvement.

Besides that, Medvedev understands the problem of the penitentiary system as a whole: prisons are overcrowded, hundreds of thousands of people who don’t pose any danger to society are serving time.  As result, when dealing with cases that aren’t of a high-profile, but from certain categories of prisoners, it is possible there will be pardons, an institution which was recently restarted after a long pause, and amnesties.  I see what has happened as a positive signal, although it was too long in the coming.

Aleksandr Ryklin, editor-in-chief of the Yezhednevny Zhurnal:

The situation was coming together in such a was that it was clear that in the end, of course, they’d release her.  This, evidently, was not an easy decision, because any decision on Yukos, clearly, is difficult for authorities.  Yukos is such a sensitive nerve that doesn’t give authorities a second of peace.  With Bakhmina, however, it felt like they would release her sooner or later.  But this does not in any way give evidence that there will be any movement relating to the other defendants in the Yukos affair.

Lev Rubinshtein, writer:

Well, first of all, this is absolutely good news.  One can’t help but be pleased when a nursing mother is is allowed to go free.  Regardless of the reasoning used by those who made the decision.

Forgive me, but I don’t believe in any well-meaning humanitarian inclinations on the part of Russia’s leadership.  What can I do – they’ve set an example for themselves with countless base acts in such a way that I see some kind of dirty trick in everything, even an instance of pardon.

And even if it weren’t there: they could have released Svetlana earlier, without mentioning that she should have been imprisoned in the first place.

Because THEY don’t do anything especially nice for no reason, one is left guessing at what they have in mind and what kind of signal they are sending.  Not so much to the public, as to each other.

But in any case- all this fades before absolute joy: Svetlana Bakhmina is free.

Irina Yasina, chair of the Regional Journalism Club:

I heard about it already, and I’m glad.  Considering how many years we have worked to make this happen, you can’t call this a surprise.  That this finally happens is true joy.   Many people have worked for many years, and it finally sunk in for the authorities, thank God.  We will hope for their actions in the future.

translation by theotherrussia.org

As the RIA Novosti news agency reports, the Moscow city court set bail for 50 million rubles ($1.82 or €1.41 million) on Monday.

The former head of the Yukos legal department gained worldwide attention in January, when his health took a turn for the worse, and prison authorities were accused of denying him medical care. The executive suffers from HIV/AIDS and lymphoma, and contracted tuberculosis while in prison. He has since gone nearly blind.

Aleksanyan, who is serving a sentence for tax evasion and fraud, was finally moved to a clinic in February. He has since had three phases of chemotherapy, and has had his spleen removed. Throughout his trial and subsequent sentence, Aleksanyan has maintained his innocence, alleging that the charges against him were politically motivated.

The executive’s legal victory marks one of the only successful trials for defendants connected to the Yukos oil company. Once Russia’s largest oil producer, the firm was systematically dismantled starting in 2003, its assets sold off and its key figures imprisoned.

Other defendants, including former CEO Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Svetlana Bakhmina, have not had any luck in appealing their sentences.

In Aleksanyan’s case, defense attorney Gevorg Dangyan’s arguments stuck with those in the courtroom:

“It is evident to everybody that this person is suffering from grave oncological illness [cancer],” he said. “He needs to concentrate all of his physical and mental strength on the battle with this disease. There must be no other decision than to deny the extension of his pre-trial restrictions.”

Bakhmina’s case has received wide public attention, with public figures like human rights defender Yelena Bonner and former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev calling for her release. The complete petition follows below.

To read more about Bakhmina’s story, read an account by journalist Grigory Pasko.

—

Help Svetlana Bakhmina

Dear friends. Svetlana Bakhmina, a Yukos attorney, was recently refused parole for the last of many times. Svetlana has served four years in a Mordovian [prison] colony, which is more than half of the term she received under articles 160 and 198 of the Russian Criminal Code. She has left two boys at home: seven-year-old Fedya and eleven-year old Grisha. Svetlana is now pregnant, in her seventh month. Usually, even our own court, which isn’t always the most humane, agrees to parole in such cases or grants a postponement of the sentence until the children reach the age of majority. This time, something has broken. Reason, conscience, mercy have either bumped into the consecrated “Yukos affair,” or else these ideas simply aren’t frequent guests in the Zubovo-Polyanky court of Mordovia.

We can mourn, railing against the inhuman system in our kitchens, then just shrug our shoulders and continue living our lives, bringing up our children, working, having fun and just living with this. Or we can do something.

Let’s appeal to the president with a letter. Even if you didn’t vote for Dmitri Medvedev– he is the president of our country, and he has the constitutional right to pardon Svetlana.

An Appeal to the President of the Russian Federation

Esteemed Dmitri Anatolyevich!

We ask you to get involved in the situation which former Yukos lawyer Svetlana Bakhmina, convicted for six and a half years incarceration, has ended up in.

Half of Bakhmina’s sentence was concluded as far back as May. This means she now has the right to parole. Those in the [prison] colony agree that she has earned it –and it’s written in her personal record. She only had reprimands at the very start of her term, and they have since been lifted. In their place there are commendations. Recently, the colony’s administration even granted her a leave.

Svetlana has two sons –one of them is seven, the other eleven. Also, she is pregnant and due to give birth in December. She is currently in the prison hospital. A court has twice refused to grant her parole…

Dmitri Anatolyevich, we understand that you cannot put pressure on the court. But you do have the right to pardon recorded in the Russian Constitution.

We, the undersigned, ask you to use this right.

You recently said, completely correctly, that signals are important in our country. We ask you, and this is very important, to pardon Svetlana, and give us the signal, to the whole country — “Citizens of Russia, civil servants, judges: be merciful, and don’t forget a person behind the letter of the law!”

The appeal can be signed on www.bakhmina.ru.

translation by theotherrussia.org