“I’ve been living for nine months without a computer, without flash drives, without everything.”

On Friday it became known that the former rector of the Russian School of Economics, Sergei Guriev, who left Russia, had several years of electronic correspondence confiscated, and in April searches and seizures were carried out at NES. The reason was also given: according to Guriev’s lawyer, all this was done within the framework of the “main YUKOS case.” Prior to this, similar information was announced by the Investigative Committee - the former rector of NES is a witness in this case. During interrogation, the economist stated that he had never received money from either YUKOS or Menatep.

Guriev is one of six Russian experts whose conclusions regarding the Khodorkovsky-Lebedev case were cited in a report by the Presidential Human Rights Council. After the publication of the report, which, according to the authors, showed that the verdict was erroneous, many of the experts announced persecution . PublicPost spoke with one of the report's authors, economist Mikhail Subbotin.

Mikhail Subbotin, Deputy Director of the Center for Legal and Economic Research, National Research University Higher School of Economics:

— Now that it is already known for sure that Guriev’s departure is connected with the YUKOS case, opinions are being expressed about the upcoming third case against Khodorkovsky. Or is this revenge against those whose findings were presented in the report?

It's hard for me to judge the motives. Another thing is that outwardly all this looks very strange, because in fact this examination was nothing more than a set of personal opinions on the part of experts, it was not a collective work. The Human Rights Council prepared its report on the basis of disparate opinions, which were in conflict with each other on some issues, so it was solely the Council's choice. Therefore, looking for a black cat in a black room when it is not there is a rather strange activity.

Is this connected with the second Yukos case? Maybe, but I think that the task of looking for YUKOS money is one thing, but digging through the personal belongings of experts is another. It seems to me that the activities of the relevant organizations are going somewhat in the wrong direction. This is the first thing. And secondly, it is a little strange that the money, which obviously went abroad, and the authorities understand this, is being sought not abroad, but in Russia. And it is quite obvious that those organizations and those people who are inside the country in no way have the capabilities that the intelligence services have to understand what happened outside the country. Therefore, all procedures look very strange. So, if searches are truly related only to examination, this deals a severe blow to the expert community and the scientific community as a whole.

“But there was already pressure on the experts who participated in the report before this.”

Yes. It started with me - on September 7 there were searches in our center and in my place personally. Then there were summonses for interrogation. In total, as far as I know, of the six Russian experts involved in the report, one had searches, three were summoned for interrogations, and one began having problems at work - in fact, he had to change his job after some time. It turns out that he was punished administratively.

— Are you talking about Anatoly Naumov now (one of the experts who took part in the preparation of the report - editor's note)?

Yes, about Naumov. He is a strong man, the author of a three-volume book on criminal law. When the problems started, he took a fairly tough position, as far as I know, so the authorities checked everything and were forced to apologize.

— How did the story with the search end?

It continues. I’ve been living for nine months without a computer, without flash drives, without everything - all my archives and developments were confiscated. You know, there was an old joke about a young man who lived in an apartment above an old man and every evening, coming after midnight, he threw his heavy shoes on the floor. And one day he came home, kicked off one shoe, and then he felt ashamed, and he carefully put the second one on the floor. And the old man began to get nervous - to wait for the second blow. This is how we now live between two shoes - the one that has been dropped and the one that is suspended.