Didn’t help Chubais “launder” money? To jail
Did the former leader of RUSNANO make illegal money legal and imprisoned those who were against it? Close associate of Anatoly Chubais, Boris Mints, is directly involved in the fraud of the Otkritie FC bank and the misappropriation of Russian citizens’ pension funds by offshore companies (O1 TRUST, O1 Properties, Crizna Holdings LTD, Denian LTD, Rafinha Holdings LTD, etc.) entering or affiliated with the O1 Group financial corporation owned by Boris Mints.
Chubais and Mints
Rucriminal.info has data that the constant financing of Anatoly Chubais's lifestyle using cash and non-cash money was routed through the offshore companies of his friend, colleague and business partner Boris Mints.
Anatoly Chubais, using the services of Boris Mints' offshore companies, made illegally obtained funds legal.
The Cypriot company O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED (currently TILSOKA LIMITED) – whose ultimate beneficiary is Boris Mints, granted loans to the Swiss company JSC “SFO Concept AG” for building an estate for Anatoly Chubais in the village of Peredelki, Odintsovo district, Moscow region (hereafter – “ZhK Peredelki ”) in the amount of about US$22,000,000.
It is worth noting that the estimated value of “ZhK Peredelki” was around 47,000,000 US dollars, and as per 3 (three) independent assessments, including the judicial one, it was between 34,000,000 to 36,500,000 US dollars.
Subsequent events unfolded in the following manner. The new shareholder of the Swiss company SFO Concept AG, Ilya Suchkov, refused to sell ZhK Peredelki to Anatoly Chubais and Boris Mints at a very low cost of 7,000,000 – 8,000,000 US dollars, which would have allowed laundering the money spent on the construction of the ZhK Peredelki. Following this, Ilya Suchkov was unjustly implicated in a fabricated criminal case in October 2016 and was later detained.
In this article, Rucriminal.info aims to objectively discuss the legal violations in the so-called preliminary investigation and legal proceedings in criminal case No. 123632 that has been ongoing for more than 6.5 years.
It is widely known that one of the aims of criminal proceedings (inquiry, pre-trial proceedings, the activities of the courts) is, among other things, to protect the individual from illegal and unjust accusations, convictions, and restrictions of rights and freedoms (clause 2, article 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation).
The Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation also requires a reasonable duration of criminal proceedings, and stipulates the necessity for the legality and validity of the activities of courts, inquiry bodies, and preliminary investigation (Article 7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation). It also guarantees the rights of the accused, including the ability to submit petitions, raise objections, access case materials, lodge complaints, review minutes of court sessions, and defend themselves through legal means (Article 47 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation).
It seems that by having laws to control the actions of investigators, prosecutors, and judges, lawlessness should not happen. But, unfortunately, in reality, things often happen differently, especially in manipulated criminal cases. And if the person behind it is a high-ranking official or a billionaire, the rights of the accused are usually ignored.
A case about false accusation, No. 123632, involving Anatoly Chubais and a representative of O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED, where Russian citizens' pension savings were likely invested, was started on October 16, 2016 against Ilya Suchkov under certain articles by the Odintsovo urban district of the Moscow region.
Despite Ilya Suchkov's ownership of the Swiss company JSC “SFO Concept AG” of the offshore company O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED, loans were taken with the initiative of Anatoly Chubais in 2014. Part of the loan was paid back early, which suggests no intent of embezzlement through deception, as alleged. False witnesses and fake evidence were brought in the case by investigator Yegorova Zh.A. of the SU UMVD of Russia for the Odintsovo urban district. The defendants were completely deprived of the right to defend themselves.
In June 2017, another criminal case was started against Ilya Suchkov under Part 4 of Art. 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as a supplement to the first case, to strengthen their illegal actions, by investigator Yegorova Zh.A. and investigator Mogilevskaya A.G. of the SU UMVD of Russia for the Odintsovo urban district.
The paradox of a criminal case under Part 4 of Art. 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is that it is based on a false version of the investigation about alleged theft from Anatoly Chubais, which was later completely refuted by documents and accounting expertise.
Documents in the case file proved that the property identified as stolen from Anatoly Chubais was bought and installed in the residential complex “Peredelki” with funds of the Swiss company JSC “SFO Concept AG” with the ownership of Ilya Suchkov. Ilya Suchkov's innocence has been proven by case materials, but he still faces the charge.
Because of the fake criminal cases, in June 2017, Ilya Suchkov was put in detention. He spent almost a year in Moscow and Moscow region's pre-trial detention centers, and was declared disabled by the efforts of investigator Egorova Zh.A.
During the investigation, investigator Egorova Zh.A. allowed the sale of material evidence, ZhK Peredelki. These illegal actions deprived the defendants of their right to defense and to carry out expert examinations. It is rumored that property allegedly stolen from Anatoly Chubais is still in ZhK Peredelki.
None of the accused's requests were considered during the preliminary investigation, and all petitions were denied without explanation.
For 4.5 years, the preliminary investigation did not really investigate criminal case No. 123632, but instead aimed to accuse Ilya Suchkov at all costs.
After 6.5 years, the proceedings in this criminal case continue, and it seems the court does not intend to stop it. The case has been returned for additional investigation twice in 2020 and 2021 by courts of Moscow and the Moscow Region, and has been in courts for 2.5 years.
We must acknowledge the creativity of the judges. They have started a sort of game involving criminal case No. 123632. On unfounded grounds, the criminal case was moved between courts in 2021 and 2023, as the courts could not determine the location of the alleged crime scene. It seems they will continue looking for the 'truth' until stopped by the authorized bodies.
After the Odintsovo City Court of the Moscow Region returned criminal case No. 123632 in June 2020 for further investigation, the investigators instead of correcting their mistakes, committed more sophisticated fraud in the case.
The investigator Yegorova Zh.A. carried out investigative actions with the injured party's representative without a statement, to conceal the criminal intent to fabricate criminal case No. 123632. She initiated another criminal case based on the same materials and combined it with the one initiated in October 2016.
The investigator Egorova Zh.A. is believed to have intentionally covered up a serious law violation in order to falsely accuse an innocent person of a more serious crime without any new evidence.
Unfortunately, the investigator Egorova Zh.A. has been committing obvious illegal actions for 4.5 years.
Systematic and serious violations of the Russian Federation's Code of Criminal Procedure, the Criminal Code, and the rights of the accused have occurred due to lack of punishment.
Ilya Suchkov's defenders have sent over 300 complaints to the prosecutor’s office, but received no response. It seems that the regulatory and supervisory authorities have silently allowed the ongoing lawlessness against Ilya Suchkov for over 6.5 years. This situation continued in the Khamovnichesky District Court of Moscow.
During the consideration of case No. 01-0104/2022, it became evident that Judge Filchenko M.S. has cynically and seriously violated the current legislation of the Russian Federation, which clearly indicates his strong interest in the case outcome.
For almost a year, the court did not provide the defendants and their lawyers with the case materials.
The court reviewed criminal case No. 01-0104/2022 without including part of the case materials mentioned in the indictment.
The court completely disregarded the consideration of the defendants’ requests and seemingly did not deem it necessary to include them in the case file.
The court declined to release the minutes of the court sessions.
The court refused to summon defense witnesses.
The court overlooked the absence of a decision recognizing Mosin D.The. as the representative of the victim – the Cypriot company O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED (TILSOKA LIMITED).
The court unlawfully reviewed criminal No. 01-0104/2022 without determining the alleged damage caused to the Cypriot company O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED (TILSOKA LIMITED) as investigated.
The court unlawfully reviewed criminal case No. 01-0104 / 2022 without the presence of the beneficiaries of the Cypriot company O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED (TILSOKA LIMITED) Mr. Mintsev, despite the significant discrepancies in the case file in their testimony, the testimony of Anatoly Chubais, and the testimony of the so-called representatives of the victim of the specified Cyprus company – Kuksa R.V., Mosina D.V. and the materials of the case.
The court unlawfully reviewed criminal case No. 01-0104/2022 without the presence of the victim Chubais A.B., despite the significant discrepancies in the amount of damage allegedly inflicted on Chubais by A.B. and the circumstances underlying the indictment.
Unfortunately, the serious violations of the Russian Federation's Code of Criminal Procedure and the constitutional rights of the accused in criminal case No. 123632 committed by the investigation and the courts may continue indefinitely.
It seems that Judge Filchenko M.S. I’ve been waiting for something to happen for almost a year. On February 21, 2023, during the trial, Judge of the Khamovnichesky District Court of Moscow Filchenko M.S. on far-fetched grounds, for the next, 2 (Second) time, she again sent, but in fact “threw off”, allegedly according to jurisdiction, criminal case No. 123632 to the Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow.
Here it is appropriate to remind the gentlemen of the judges of the norms of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation prohibiting the courts from arguing about the jurisdiction of criminal cases. Nevertheless, the courts in the above-mentioned criminal case for 2 (two) years “cannot decide on its jurisdiction”.
However, such “zeal” of the investigators of the SU UMVD of Russia for the Odintsovo urban district of Egorova Zh.A. and Mogilevskaya A.G., judges of the Khamovnichesky District Court of Moscow and the prosecutor’s office, can hardly be explained by professional inexperience. Here, as one should assume, the interest of Anatoly Chubais, and an obvious one at that. In what it is expressed, I would like to hope that the competent authorities will determine. It would be naive to believe that this interest is not coordinated by the people of Anatoly Chubais. And it is not at all appropriate, it is somehow even shameful to talk about justice, and even with respect for the rights of the accused, if we are talking about a case “ordered” by Anatoly Chubais and his fugitive friend Boris Mints. I would like to wait until gentlemen judges, prosecutors answer one question: How many more years do they intend to “administer criminal” justice not in the interests of the Law, but in the interests of Anatoly Chubais?
