The defense of Igor Chuyan, the former head of Rosalkogolregulirovanie (RAR), who is waiting for a decision on his extradition from Montenegro to Russia, has launched an attack on the investigation.
The ex-official's lawyers claim that the criminal prosecution was initiated by an improper person, with non-compliance with procedural deadlines and other errors. However, the Moscow City Court did not consider the claims against the investigation worthy of attention, leaving Mr. Chuyan under arrest in absentia.
Igor Chuyan's defense recently appealed to the Moscow City Court against the decision of the Basmanny District Court, which authorized a two-month arrest of the ex-head of the RAR, starting from the moment he is detained in Russia or extradited from abroad.
Aleksey Yakushkin, the representative of the accused, stated that there were no grounds for choosing a measure of restraint in absentia.
According to Yakushkin, the criminal case was initiated on April 27, 2018 by a person who cannot replace the investigator. The defender noted that, according to the Code of Criminal Procedure (CPC), decisions to open a criminal case are made by an investigator or the head of an investigative body. An investigator does not have the authority to initiate proceedings, as stated in the CPC.
Yakushkin further noted that Art. 33 and part 2 of Art. 201 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation could not be applied to his client, as they provide for criminal liability for abuse in a commercial structure, and his principal was the head of the state RAR.
The lawyer pointed out that the criminal case was initially initiated against the former president of OFK-bank Nikolay Gordeev and “unidentified persons” and not against Igor Chuyan.
The lawyer argued that his client was accused of committing a crime without filing a personal case against him.
He also noted that the criminal investigation was preceded by a pre-investigation check, which exceeded the allowed procedural period by more than a year.
It was also noted that the violation of the procedure for initiating a criminal case against a specific person invalidates all subsequent operational, investigative and judicial actions, including putting Igor Chuyan on the wanted list, his arrest in absentia, detention abroad and a request for his extradition. The defense lawyer demanded to cancel the 2018 court decision, restoring the rights of his client, or to conduct a new trial at the request of the Main Investigative Committee of the ICR.
In his objections to the lawyer’s appeal, the representative of the Main Investigation Department of the ICR called the criminal prosecution of Mr. Chuyan lawful and justified. He said that in relation to Igor Chuyan, on August 2, 2018 and March 2, 2020, decisions were made to bring him as a defendant. The Prosecutor General’s Office agreed with the accusation and, after the arrest of the ex-head of the RAR in Montenegro, sent a request for the extradition of the accused to Russia.
The ruling of the Basmanny District Court of December 2018, according to the ICR officer, is also legal, “since the investigator’s petition was brought before the court with the consent of the appropriate official, duly motivated, substantiated by factual data confirming the impossibility of choosing a milder measure of restraint.” The investigator also said that Igor Chuyan’s involvement in the crime is confirmed by the testimony of representatives of the injured party, witnesses, as well as the verdict passed last year by the Meshchansky District Court to the banker Gordeev and entered into force.
The Moscow City Court did not raise questions about the validity of both the charges in absentia against Igor Chuyan and his arrest.
Now detained in October last year in Montenegro, Igor Chuyan is in a pre-trial detention center in the city of Spuzh. The Podgorica court received documents on his extradition, which he should soon consider.
