Next stage

The prosecution at the second trial in the case of Khodorkovsky and Lebedev in the Khamovnichesky Court suddenly announced that it would no longer present evidence or question witnesses. Thus, the next stage of the process begins, at which the defense will present evidence and question witnesses.

At a press conference preceding the start of this stage, Khodorkovsky's lawyer Vadim Klyuvgant emphasized that over the past year, during which prosecutors read or paraphrased or distorted hundreds of documents and questioned about 50 witnesses (out of about 300 people on the indictment list), nothing was said about what, in essence, the accusation should be based on, namely, where, when and under what circumstances it was discovered that the oil or shares that Khodorkovsky and Lebedev are accused of stealing were missing. Thus, lawyers can conclude that the defendants are charged with crimes that were never committed by anyone - not only by themselves, but by anyone at all. That is, the accusation is completely falsified. That is why, according to Klyuvgant, prosecutors and investigators hid from the court and defense not only a number of important documents that were disadvantageous to them, but also “the so-called victims.” “In fact, they did not suffer anything and for this very reason they are afraid to appear in court,” the lawyer said. Lebedev's lawyer Konstantin Rivkin added that not a single head of the three oil producing companies from which, according to the prosecution, Khodorkovsky and Lebedev stole oil, was invited to court or questioned.

According to the plan approved back in April last year, the presentation of evidence by the defense will begin with Khodorkovsky's testimony (this will happen on April 6). Next, written evidence will be examined, defense witnesses will be questioned, written evidence from specialists will be presented, specialists will be questioned and, finally, Lebedev will give his testimony. On April 5, the results will be summed up: the defense has the opportunity to express its attitude towards the prosecutors and the court, and express its attitude towards the prosecution by filing motions. Khodorkovsky’s lawyer Natalya Terekhova told reporters about this.

The lawyers noted that they have no illusions about the outcome of the trial, but they note all the violations on the part of the prosecution and the court. Lebedeva's lawyer Elena Liptser spoke about claims to the European Court of Human Rights. Khodorkovsky's defense attorney, Yuri Schmidt, noted that although the trial seems to be proceeding quite calmly and, unlike the first trial, the judge gives both the defendants and lawyers the opportunity to speak, and does little to answer their questions, this is still only the appearance of an equal and adversarial process. In particular, because the case lacks the most important documents, and all attempts by the defense to fill out the case materials run into the fact that the court rejects every petition of this kind, and the prosecutor appeals exclusively to the indictment, as if there was nothing else besides it. Finally, Schmidt, by his own admission, “never in my life have I seen the section “witnesses for the defense” - something that, in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code, should be in the case file - was completely omitted: the investigator refused to comply with the imperative order law, and therefore we will have to make extraordinary efforts in order to obtain the examination of every witness for the defense.” The lawyer emphasized that in any case, the decision in this case will ultimately be made not by the court, but by those whose will it carries out. However, Schmidt noted that time has changed since the first trial: over the years, a huge number of decisions of foreign courts have accumulated on various issues related to YUKOS, and one cannot help but admit that the authorities feel obvious inconvenience from the trial, which inevitably does not go as smoothly as the first process.