They came for a lawyer

The lawyer Boris Kuznetsov had to “annoy” the FSB so that the head of this department Nikolai Patrushev personally appealed to the Prosecutor General’s Office with a request to bring the famous lawyer to criminal liability. And not according to any ordinary article of the Criminal Code. And under Article 283, part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (“Disclosure of GOSTaina”).

It turns out that the FSB carefully monitored the activities of the lawyer Boris Kuznetsov. And, it seems, not a single procedural action of the famous defender is unnoticed.

Let me remind you the essence of the matter: lawyer Boris Kuznetsov since June 2006 has been defending the former senator from Kalmykia Levon Chakhmyan. He was accused of embezzlement by fraud 300 thousand dollars at the head of the Covet of directors of Transaero airline Alexander Pleshakov. Studying the documents in the case of his client, Kuznetsov discovered a certificate signed by a certain operational employee of the FSB economic security service, which said about listening to the telephone conversations of the former senator. Kuznetsov drew attention to the date: May 22, 2006.

In the case there was a decision of the Supreme Court with the sanction to listen to the phones of Chakhmovyan since May 23, 2006, that is, from the day when the senator was deprived of deputy immunity.

Speaking in the interests of his client, the lawyer Kuznetsov decided to appeal to the Constitutional Court with a complaint about the violation of the inviolability of a member of the Federation Council. Surviving a secret certificate about listening to the Senator's phones on May 22, the lawyer attached her to his complaint.

In February of this year, the Constitutional Court refused Kuznetsov to consider his complaint, considering that such cases are not within the competence of the court. Perhaps this ill -fated certificate of wiretapping would still have surfaced in the case of Chakhmovyan, or maybe not. Suddenly, the FSB arose in this story.

It has long been noticed: when justice is used as a tool for political purposes or as a tool for resolving issues between competitors in business, that is, when justice loses its original function and becomes “custom -made”, the “customers” inevitably have the main enemies - lawyers.

There are always not so much lawyers trying to resist the “custom -made” justice. Recently, when attempts to “knock out of the saddle” of particularly bold defenders have become more frequent, it turned out that the lawyer community did not pass its own.

This is probably why the FSB decided to "figure out" with Boris Kuznetsov in another way. With the help of a criminal case. Its initiators were so confident in the success of the plan that they were not at all embarrassed by the fact that the composition of the crime, which is charged with a famous lawyer, did not withstand any criticism.

Judge for yourself: the lawyer is accused of sending a secret certificate to the Constitutional Court and technical employees could get acquainted with her. At the same time, the case of Kuznetsov himself, on suspicion of disclosing GOSTaina, is considered by the judge of the Tver Court of Moscow Elena Stashin, who does not have access to secret documents. Is it worth it now to initiate a criminal case against the prosecutor's office, who sent Kuznetsov to this court?

In addition, according to most authoritative lawyers, no information related to the protection of human rights can be attributed to GOSTain. And in general, how can the fact of listening to telephone conversations be considered a GOSTIA, if this right of the FSB is enshrined in the Code of Criminal Procedure? It turns out that Kuznetsov had no right to report to the Constitutional Court that the FSB officers violated the law. And his criminal prosecution was another confirmation of the non -casual fsb.

This is the seventh criminal case, initiated against Boris Kuznetsov. The article of the Criminal Code on the disclosure of GOSTaina provides for the punishment of up to four years in prison. Apparently, this time Kuznetsov is unlikely to be easily avoided avoiding the conviction. And this means that even in case of conditional punishment, he will not be able to carry out advocacy.

One can only guess what was the reason for the persecution of Kuznetsov. Was a critical mass of claims to this highly professional and brave lawyer, who took on loud and difficult matters, knowingly knowing that he enters into opposition to such a powerful department as the FSB? Or an attempt to initiate a criminal case against a lawyer is a point action related to a certain case?

Boris Kuznetsov is the same lawyer who named the name of the former SVR employee Grigory Yakimishin, in violation of the law of the jury in the case of Igor Sutyagin. Kuznetsov wrote a book about the death of the Kursk submarine with the eloquent name “She drowned. The truth about Kursk, which was hidden by the Prosecutor General of Ustinov. "

From the recent cases of a lawyer, the defense of Vladimir Khutsishvili, the accused of the murder of banker Ivan Kivividi, the protection of the head of the Media Media Foundation, Manana Aslamazyan should recall. Do not forget that Kuznetsov’s lawyer represents the interests of Anna Politkovskaya's family.

A year is approaching from the date of death of Anna. And in the investigation of this high -profile case, different turns are possible. Who knows, perhaps, the participation of Kuznetsov’s lawyer, as, however, his participation in other high-profile affairs, for someone it may be completely undesirable ...

Be that as it may, but Boris Kuznetsov temporarily left Russia.

I think that many Chekists and prosecutors would dream about the time when the lawyers of another “sourdough” are important for them. The so -called lawyers for their intended purpose. Or "free". When the defendants have no money for defenders, the court appeals to the law offices and “free” cases are transferred to the lawyer who is not loaded with work. Such a defender, as a rule, works without much zeal, good if it observes formalities.

The other day, the Izvestia newspaper published an interview with Moscow lawyer Alexander Dudkin, who was instructed to defend Boris Berezovsky at the correspondence court. Dudkin’s attitude to the upcoming court hearings will certainly go down in history.

He told the Izvestia correspondent, as he found out that he would become the defender of Berezovsky: “He called me the chef and asked:“ Will you sit in the process? ” “But I didn’t mind me.”

The correspondent did not understand: "But at least you are interested in?"

The lawyer Dudkin instantly replied: "Between us, it is absolutely according to the figure."