Babushkinsky District Court in Moscow rejected the request for early release from prison by a lawyer named Alexey Litvinov. Alexey Litvinovis a central figure in an unbelievable corruption case that was uncovered by the VChK-OGPU telegram channel. He played a role in transferring large bribes and was supposed to be a key figure in a major corruption investigation in the Kuban region. However, he did not become one. Litvinov provided testimony against dozens of judges, regional and federal officials, as well as the former mayor of Sochi, Anatoly Pakhomov. All of his statements were verified. However, the materials related to the case were suddenly buried, and authorities decided to only pursue a few minor individuals based on Pakhomov’s testimony. Only former deputy mayors of Sochi, Anatoly Rykov and and Sergei Yurin, as well as Alexey Litvinov, were accused. Rucriminal.info continues to cover this top corruption story..
On 06/08/2019, the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation declined to enter into a pre-trial agreement with Litvinov A.Yu., as he attempted to portray himself as an 'intermediary' instead of an 'organizer' of the scheme for legalizing unauthorized construction objects.
A pre-trial agreement with Litvinov A.Yu. was eventually signed after Litvinov agreed to 'confirm EVERYTHING stated in the charges', including:
– involvement in the formation of the Org. Group in 2010
– acceptance of a bribe by the group from the developer Stroganov I.A. for the Sophia-Park and Marina-Park residential complexes amounting to at least 150 million rubles.
– receipt of bribes from the developer Klyus V.V. for the Svetlana-Park residential complex, totaling no less than 40 million rubles, among others.
On January 21, 2020, the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation verified 'the information provided in the testimony of Liivinov A.Yu. about A.N. , Uleeva S.N., Borozdina M.S., Shafieva A.Yu.'
The head of the investigation group of the Main Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, A.V. Salivonik, established that Rykov A.N. received at least 25 million rubles from Stroganov I.A., allegedly for exerting influence on the trial involving the administration of Sochi.
Additionally, the leader of the investigation team from the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation found that Litvinov A.Yu. got 60 million rubles from Klyus V.V. to speed up the process of approving a building permit, without informing Rykov and Yurin.
It shows that Litvinov A.Yu. is lying boldly and regularly.
The stance of the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation, which has not yet taken action in accordance with Art. 317.8 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation regarding the review of the sentence against the defendant with whom a pre-trial agreement on cooperation was made, is due to the discovery of false information reported by the defendant.
Staff of the Directorate of the Security Service of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation were completely correct when they pointed out the unauthorized buildings in the Marina-Park and Svetlana-Park complexes in their reports to the department head, Ivan Tkachev.
Rucriminal.info has judicial documents that were the basis for acknowledging the objects as “commissioned” and recognizing the developers' ownership of these objects.
Legal documents related to the Marina-Park complex:
On 09/09/2015 in case N2-2550/2015, Judge O.A. Didik of the Khostinsky District Court of Sochi, ruled in favor of the developer against Rosreestr, recognizing the developer’s ownership of the 4-floor reconstructed pool building.
On 06/29/2016 in case N 2a – 4990/2016, Judge V.A. Sluka of the central district court of the city of Sochi ruled in favor of the developer against the administration of the Krasnodar Territory (Gosstroynadzor), acknowledging the Marina-Park complex as being put into operation with 10 floors.
On 03/23/2017 in case N 2-1511 / 2017, Judge V.A. Vlasenko of the Central District Court of Sochi ruled in favor of I.S. Vorobiev against the cadastral engineer, recognizing the need to preserve the building in a reconstructed form and acknowledging the ownership of the 11th and 12th floors.
Legal documents related to the Svelana-Park complex:
On 06/13/2019, the Leninsky District Court of Krasnodar ruled in favor of M.A. Kostanovskiy against the administration of the Krasnodar Territory, preserving a 10-storey building in a reconstructed state.
On 18.08.2020, Judges N.V. Dunyushkina, D.A. Bashinsky, and Chaban L.N. upheld the decision of the Khostinsky District Court of Sochi in case N2-2050/2019 dated 12/20/2019, preserving the reconstructed 13-storey building of the complex.
However, for some unknown reason, someone replaced the “scheme of legalization of unauthorized construction” mentioned by the employees of the Department K of the SES of the FSB of the Russian Federation with administrative processes that essentially replaced the procedure for issuing building permits, which ended in the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. And this person forgot to inform the leadership of the FSB of the Russian Federation about this.
2) 18.08.2020 Judge N.V. Dunyushkina, D.A. Bashinsky, Chaban L.N. upheld the decision of the Khostinsky District Court of Sochi in case N2-2050/2019 dated 12/20/2019 on the preservation of the reconstructed 13-storey building of the complex.
However, for some reason, someone, for some reason, replaced the “scheme of legalization of unauthorized construction” about which the employees of the Department K of the SES of the FSB of the Russian Federation wrote with administrative processes that essentially replaced the procedure for issuing building permits, which ended in the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. And this someone forgot to notify the leadership of the FSB of the Russian Federation about this.
Information about the arrests of the Litvinovs’ property is distorted. Neither the investigation nor the state prosecution found out, within the framework of the pre-trial agreement, information about the whereabouts of the funds, as taken out by Litvinov A.Yu. to Austria (3 million euros and 700 thousand dollars), and withdrawn by him and his father from the accounts already during the investigation. Also, for some reason, the Litvinovs, unlike other defendants, disposed of real estate without any problems, including after the court issued judicial acts on the imposition of arrests.
