The process didn't start

The court returned the “Khlebnikov case” to the prosecutor’s office

The retrial in the Moscow City Court of the scandalous case of the murder in the summer of 2004 of the editor-in-chief of the Russian version of Forbes magazine, Paul Klebnikov, ended yesterday before it had even really begun. Court hearings were suspended more than six months ago due to the disappearance of one of the defendants, Kazbek Dukuzov . After the first acquittal in this case, he and two other defendants - Musa Vakhaev and Moscow notary Fail Sadretdinov - were released. But the Supreme Court (SC), following a protest from the prosecutor's office, overturned the verdict and ordered a new trial of the case . Dukuzov did not appear for the new trial and was put on the wanted list. A preventive measure in the form of arrest was chosen in absentia. It was assumed that yesterday the judge would separate Dukuzov's case into separate proceedings, and the trial would continue with the participation of the two existing defendants. However, he decided to return the entire case to the prosecutor’s office, explaining that “the investigation did not provide evidence that the search for Dukuzov was conducted properly.”

The editor-in-chief of the Russian version of Forbes magazine, Paul Klebnikov, was killed in Moscow on July 9, 2004, while leaving the editorial office on Dokukina Street. Unknown persons fired pistols at him from a passing car. The seriously wounded Khlebnikov died on the way to the intensive care unit, stuck with the medical team in the hospital elevator. Chechens Musa Vakhaev and Kazbek Dukuzov and Moscow notary Fail Sadretdinov were arrested in connection with the case. The Chechens, according to investigators, were the direct perpetrators of the assassination attempt, and the notary, who had nothing to do with the murder of Khlebnikov, at one time allegedly used the services of these same killers, ordering one of his acquaintances from them. The prosecutor's office considers Khozh-Akhmet Nukhaev, a well-known former Chechen field commander and crime boss, to have ordered the assassination attempt on the journalist. According to the prosecution, Khlebnikov published a long interview with Nukhaev in book form without his consent. The publication actually put an end to Nukhaev’s political career, making him out to be an obvious bandit. For this, according to investigators, Nukhaev took revenge. It has still not been possible to detain him.

In the spring of 2006, a jury acquitted all three defendants and they were released. The prosecutor's office appealed the verdict, and in November the Supreme Court sent the case to a different court for consideration. All this time, the Chechens Dukuzov and Vakhaev remained under recognizance not to leave. Sadretdinov, almost immediately after his acquittal, was arrested again - this time on charges of fraud and was already sentenced to nine years in prison.

Neither Dukuzov nor Vakhaev appeared at the new hearings, which began on February 15 of this year. Only Sadretdinov, who was taken under escort from prison, appeared before the court. The process was postponed for a month. During this time, the defendants were to be re-served with subpoenas.

A month later, Musa Vakhaev joined Sadretdinov, who explained that he had been ill in February. His lawyers also explained Dukuzov’s absence due to illness, reporting with reference to his relatives that he was in a hospital in Chechnya. In this regard, the defenders asked the court to postpone the consideration of the case for another week. But the state prosecutor filed a motion to arrest Dukuzov, believing that he was hiding from justice. As a result, the judge put Dukuzov on the wanted list, and the case was suspended until his capture.

What caused the need for yesterday's meeting, none of the participants in the process could really explain. There were only suggestions that in this way the judge may have “dumped” a “dead case” to the prosecutor’s office so as not to spoil the reporting for the New Year. The entire meeting, which again was attended only by Vakhaev and Sadretdinov, lasted no more than 10 minutes. The judge simply decided to return the case to the prosecutor's office. He motivated this by the fact that the investigation did not provide evidence of a search for Dukuzov.

Lawyers for the accused expressed bewilderment about this yesterday, noting that the case can be returned to the prosecutor's office only if fatal deficiencies are discovered. But no one mentioned them yesterday. Meanwhile, the law gives the court the right, in the event of the disappearance of one of the defendants, to divide the criminal case and continue its consideration in relation to the existing defendants. However, so far no one has objected to the judge, especially since the representative of the prosecutor’s office did not express his position. As a result, the participants in the process decided to take a wait-and-see approach and see what comes of it.

Eduard LOMOVTSEV