Help the President

We have a responsibility to achieve true respect for the law and

overcome legal nihilism.

Dmitry Medvedev

The second trial in the case of Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Platon Lebedev begins. Today it is quite difficult to assess to what extent this process worries society, since official information is strictly dosed and is unlikely to provide information that is unfavorable to the authorities. And information that is not combed from above is available only in a small number of media and, accordingly, is not available to everyone. However, there remains the Internet. I typed several combinations of words into the search. And this is what I received:

“The YUKOS Case” - 4 million pages;

falsification of the Khodorkovsky case - 130 thousand pages;

who is against Khodorkovsky - 2 million pages;

Putin and Khodorkovsky - 2 million pages;

the truth about Khodorkovsky - 1 million pages;

the second trial of Khodorkovsky - 612 thousand pages;

Khodorkovsky - 5 million pages;

Platon Lebedev - 1 million pages.

You may not agree, but it seems to me that these figures indicate that there is some kind of public demand for the truth about this case. To be honest, I don’t have much hope that Medvedev will have enough political will to remove himself from the clearing of his predecessor’s games. But there is another way - the simplest one. Make the process as open as possible. This benefits everyone except a few people in the country (nomina sunt odiosa * - any Latin scholar will confirm). An open process will give the current president the opportunity to at least somehow reinforce the talk about the need for the rule of law. An open process will give every (every!!!) citizen of the country the opportunity to figure out who stole what and from whom. An open process will give the domestic Themis a chance to show whether it is dependent on the call from above. An open process may be disadvantageous if the facts have been manipulated (yes or no?). An open process is disadvantageous if there is someone who directly benefits from the liquidation of Yukos (yes or no?). An open process is unprofitable if the speeches of the highest officials of the state about the equality of all citizens before the law are lies (yes or no?). Based on the listed alternatives, it turns out that there are premises in Moscow that are better suited for such a process than the Khamovnichesky Court. I went to the first trial, I saw documents, in particular, a paper that was not signed by Platon Lebedev, but was attached to the case as signed. They can tell me - get out, you don’t understand anything about jurisprudence. I really don’t understand anything about it, maybe I’m biased, I’m probably not the only one. So let there be an open process so that everyone can draw their own conclusions. Let there be an open process so that His Majesty the Russian Law receives its laurels. Let there be an open trial to prove that our government did not drive itself into a hopeless situation with the case of Khodorkovsky and Lebedev. It may be naive, but Russian parties large and small - all active players in the country's political field - are interested in the openness of this process. Write. Demand. Summon. Not a single call will be superfluous. Of course, there are many fewer parties in Russia than 93,415 - this is the number of specific citizens who signed an appeal to the president asking him to pardon Svetlana Bakhmina. The President did not answer his voters. Perhaps he will not consider it necessary to respond to requests from political parties. But the absence of a result is also a result. And then somehow, suddenly, by itself, the only possible room in the country appears - the same one where one character said about another: “I feel such personal hostility, right?” If this process is of no interest to anyone, then I clicked the numbers in the search engines myself, check it out! According to some opinion polls, sympathy for Khodorkovsky is growing during his imprisonment. Do you know why? Because he behaves with dignity, unlike those who are itching, who pull disgusting tales out of nowhere from supposedly prison life, find reasons for a punishment cell on the day of the golden wedding of Khodorkovsky’s parents, and generally fuss in every possible way. So, maybe those who are afraid of growing sympathy for one of the most famous prisoners in the country will still benefit from an open trial? I recently heard this, excuse me, cartoon, that it was a great idea to bring Khodorkovsky to Moscow during a crisis and show the citizens who is to blame for everything! Well, have you changed your mind about the public trial? This is not an open letter to Dmitry Anatolyevich, these are thoughts out loud... And the open trial in the Khodorkovsky case, Mr. President, you yourself would need much more than it might seem at first glance.

They will tell me, am I breaking into an open door? There is a place for journalists - a special room with laser panels so that the press can observe the progress of the case. And, if you remember the first case, it was full of colleagues from all TV channels. And there was information about the case in the press... Not all. I would like, you know, the triumph of the law, and not those who are “sunt of odious”. Eka was daydreaming... No, we can, of course, be glad that at the beginning of the 21st century not only do we have panels, but also a certain code of honor among the leaders of our homeland. High-profile cases of the thirties were “formulated” in such a way that the authorities were not afraid of open trials. Thank God it didn't come to that. God bless. Still, the process must be open and adversarial. And the law must triumph, as the president once said. I would like to follow his instructions.

*Names are hateful - let us not name names (Latin saying)