The prosecutor in the Yanukovych case - about the visits of Surkov to Mezhigorye, calls to Putin before the execution of the Maidan and the evacuation of the cursory president to Russia

The prosecutor is 39 years old. At 26, he became the hero of the publication in The Independent. The captain of the investigative department of the prosecutor's office of Kyiv revealed the multimillion-dollar scams of Naftogaz-Ukraine NAC, proved the involvement of Igor Bakay, the Almighty Head of the Company, at that time-the head of public administration of affairs, the “manager of the President Leonid Kuchma, and ... was dismissed. The “orange” revolution returned the young lawyer to work, already as part of the investigative group of the Prosecutor General’s Office, which was engaged in the clarification of the circumstances of the poisoning of the President Viktor Yushchenko. The corrosive Donskoy turned into a personal enemy of many politicians, including from the "orange" team.

After the President Yanukovych came to power, investigators in the Yushchenko case were dismissed. Alexei himself, for whom the general prosecutor Viktor Pshonka suddenly stood in front of his deputies, was not fired, as they gathered, but transferred to the organizational and methodological department of the Investigative Department of the GPU.

The second Maidan, the events associated with him, and the new government returned the Don opportunity to do what love again. Alexey jokes: "I, rather, Zheglov, not Sharapov." After graduating with honors from the Yaroslav Wise Donskoy Law Academy, he refused to go to graduate school, believing that his calling was a consequence.

The current position of Donskoy is pronounced with difficulty: the head of the department of procedural leadership in criminal proceedings of investigators of the Department of Special Investigations of the Department of Special Assembly of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine. In this capacity, Alexei participated in the investigation of episodes on executions in the center of Kyiv 48 people during the “Revolution of Dignity” and currently in the group of prosecutors supports the charge against five former Berkut fighters in court. The theft of a huge amount of budget funds once allocated for the construction of a new GPU building and cooked by the former “intercessor boss”, Victor Pshonka, as well as crimes committed by “Titches” from the “stronghold”, he also investigated.

The electronic declaration of income of the Don prosecutor himself is boring for the journalistic gaze. From real estate - an apartment of 55 squares, there is no cottage, there is no car, there is no land, there are no jewelry, but there are several small hryvnia loans in banks.

It is easy to talk with Alexei Donskoy. True, he warns in advance: part of what he told, answering questions, before the court is not subject to public publicity and will be deleted during the authorization of the interview.

"Ukraine should be less at the ECHR!"

- In the Obolonsky court of Kyiv, the first process in the history of Ukraine began on the elected president. The “fugitive legitimate” article is charged, except for the others, the article about the Stateizer. Given the absentee process, what consequences promise this?

- First of all: I do not deal with the publicity of stateism, it is conducted by the Main Military Prosecutor's Office. Ask them more correctly.

Regarding absentee conviction in general. There is a premature to talk about possible consequences for Yanukovych. The formation of the legislative framework in this area in Ukraine has not yet been completed, changes are made in the Code of Criminal Procedure and will still be amended. The rights and obligations are determined ( *defendant. - *O. M. ) in the event that the conviction is sentenced. As far as I know, they offer norms that make it possible to consider the case under the usual procedure if a convicted person arrives in our country in absentia. More precisely, if it is possible to bring it, the verdict must be reviewed.

- But it is clear that, of his own will, Yanukovych will not appear to Ukraine! If we assume that he will be pronounced an absentee conviction, is the conditional Ukrainian Mossad is able to take measures to deliver and transfer the “correspondence” to the “hospital”?

- To my great regret, the "conditional Ukrainian" Mossad "does not exist. I repeat - to great regret. And I am sure that if Yanukovych’s conviction was issued, the manipulation of his lawyers in the European Court of Human Rights with procedural aspects of the case will immediately begin to discredit the verdict.

I will express a personal opinion. In its law enforcement, Ukraine should look less at the ECHR! We need changes to the criminal procedural law, which today is not even that absolutizing, but sacrifices the practice of the European Court. I know from open sources: such an attitude towards this body is not uncommon in the countries of the European Union.

Kremlin saved Yanukovych, but put on Azarov

- The Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation offered the Prosecutor General of Ukraine the opportunity to interrogate Yanukovych in Russia, in the presence of Ukrainian investigators. Maybe it makes sense to agree if the cooperation of structures, albeit at the level of official letters and requests, continues?

- As far as I know, the proposal of Russians concerned the interrogation in the case of the Stateismman, this time. And two: in our case, we raised before the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation the question of confirming the fact that Yanukovych is located in Russia. But three years received unsubscribes - "it is impossible to fulfill in connection with the political component of the case." Only at the request of the defense, which was announced in the Svyatoshinsky District Court in the case in relation to the employees of Berkut, the Russians agreed to fulfill the order of the Ukrainian court on video dialings of Yanukovych and Shulyak. ( Stanislav Shulyak-Lieutenant General, ex-commander of the internal troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine. Since March 2014, is on the wanted list of the SBU.-O. M. ) And they did not agree the first time, according to reports in the press.

About two months ago, we sent another request to the Russian Federation, where we asked to interrogate Yanukovych as a suspect in the case of massacres on February 18-24, 2014 in the central part of Kyiv. There is no answer.

-Would you consider it useful for the investigation in the case of executions on the Maidan Full Interrogation of the ex-president of Ukraine, but in the territory of the Russian Federation?

- In order to hear certain things, let Yanukovych speak out as much as possible - yes. In general, I am ready to listen to Yanukovych carefully, without interrupting, for hours, even for days. But only in order to further check what he said, to ask specific questions in essence and on the basis of evidence existing in the case. And here the nuances arise ...

On the territory of Ukraine, the prosecutor and investigator has enough authority to ensure the proper procedure for interrogation and stop any violations of the law. For example, make a remark to a lawyer, if he breaks off an investigative action, turns him into a show, as was the case during a video of Rostov-on-Don-Kyiv. Several comments, the last warning, and Yanukovych is invited to invite another defender.

Where are the guarantees that Russian law enforcement officers will ensure the proper interrogation of the ex-president of Ukraine in Russia? Neither Yanukovych himself nor the Russian authorities are interested in this situation: Yanukovych can say something superfluous. Hence the shocking of his defender during the video conference. Against the background of the exemplary impeccable behavior of the Rostov judge, someone needed to tear up dangerous questions to orient the client: it is time to pronounce the next “I don’t know” or “I don’t remember”.

Therefore, the request for interrogation as a suspect, of course, we sent to the Russian Federation, but we do not expect effectiveness. The only goal is to ensure the right of the suspect to defense. Even if Yanukovych hides and evades the investigation, he still has the right to testify.

- On March 4, 2014, the Russian President confirmed to reporters the same thing that Churkin said the day before from the UN rostrum. Namely: from Yanukovych to Putin received an official request to introduce troops into the rebellious Maidan Ukraine. The full record of that press conference of three years ago was preserved on the network. But in March 2017, the press secretary of the President of Russia Peskov surprised the media: "No letter to the administration was received and registered!" Yanukovych himself in an interview with RIA Novosti continued to insist: he wrote, turned, asked for troops ... How to understand such discrepancies?

- Attempts to prove that the statements did not exist, look ridiculous. We had a whole range of issues on the implementation of the military scenario in the Donbass as a single scenario with murders on February 20 on the Maidan. We tried to ask Yanukovych about this during a video request. They tried to find out how the famous request was born to whom he dictated the text, and if he wrote, on which computer, with whom and under what circumstances he transmitted to the Kremlin, and so on. Verification issues in relation to events that preceded the letter. Everything blocked the defense. But if Yanukovych got the opportunity to speak out of his version of the events and said: “I did not give the order to shoot!” - Then we must, using interrogation, check how the appeal to Putin appeared.

-Yanukovych can be of any interest for the Russian authorities in connection with Ukraine?

-And then, and now Russia did not put on Yanukovych, but on Azarov ( ex-Prime Minister of Ukraine, hides in the Russian Federation.- O. M. ) and Klyuyev ( ex-head of the presidential administration, hidden in the Russian Federation.-O. m. **).

- Why?

- Azarov and his entourage in Ukraine were stably Russian -oriented, and Yanukovych was looking for benefits in Europe or in the Russian Federation. Hence the shies from the European course to Eurasian. What an ideology there! The only ideology is personal enrichment. In this regard, he did not suit Russia: unreliable. Therefore, the Kremlin seems to save Yanukovych, but in fact he knows the price.

I got to Russia. Two times

-During a video request, you in a journalist have led the interlocutor from the comfort zone. They asked with the affirmative intonation about the secret visit of Surkov to Mezhigorye, at the time of the confrontation on the Maidan, about the negotiations of Surkov and Akhmetov. Yanukovych was noticeably confused. Do you have evidence or just such a technique?

- Yes, the investigation has been proven: Surkov saw Yanukovych on January 20, 2014, in Mezhigorye. Surkov arrived there no later than seven in the evening and left about midnight.

But to Akhmetov, Surkov flew to Donetsk much later, on February 12, 2014, and they met in the Akhmetov mansion. Moreover, Surkov flew from the Crimea and at the end of the conversation immediately went to Moscow. Frankly, I would hardly share such information with the media if Rinat Akhmetov gave true or at least plausible testimonies about the goals and the subject of this meeting. For some reason, it so happened that Akhmetov turned out to be the only one whose interrogation is the leadership of the GPU Main Investigative Department ( *we are talking about the previous leaders.- *O. M. ) actively tried to disrupt. But then, when we promised publicity, he refused the venture.

More about Yanukovych. In conditions of limited opportunities, we needed to demonstrate the inaccuracy of the answers of the ex-president, insincerity. Show the jury to the court that he cannot be believed. And this gives reason to question the veracity of all the testimony of Yanukovych regarding the Maidan. We set such a tactical task before the meeting, and, I believe, we coped with it in general.

- How deep did you manage to explore the line of “Surkov -Akhmetov”? Does she stretch from the Maidan before the war in the Donbass or began much earlier?

- I can't give a detailed answer. The investigation continues.

- Akhmetov participated in Yanukovych’s “evacuation” from Ukraine?

-Yanukovych from Kharkov, after the failed congress of the southeast of Ukraine, when everything went not according to the script, flew to Akhmetov, to Donetsk.

- And how did you get to Russia?

- In fact, he got there twice. The first time - on the night of February 22 to 23, 2014. From the village of Urzuf, Donetsk region, on the coast of the Sea of ​​Azov, his, together with Klyuyev, part of personal protection and accompanying persons ( *we are talking about the roommate of Yanukovych, Lyubov lie down. - *O. M. ) by two helicopters of the Armed Forces of the Armed Forces of the Armed Forces of the Armed Forces were thrown into Yeysk. How these helicopters were not discovered by Ukrainian border guards - the question is open.

On the territory of the Russian Federation, Yanukovych was ten to twenty hours, made an internal flight around the country, from Yeysk to Anapa, already on a military transport aircraft. Whether I met someone from the Russian government, today has not been proven.

At about 13.00 in Kyiv, he flew from Anapa to the Guards, to the military airfield under Simferopol, which at that time rented the Black Sea Fleet of Russia. In the Crimea, on the basis of the fleet, he was up to the night from February 23 to 24, and even then the Black Sea Fleet went to the federal warship. We have evidence regarding the general of the Russian army, which led the operation of the movement of Yanukovych from the Donetsk region to the Krasnodar Territory and from there to the Crimea. The personality of a person from the protection of the President of Russia was also established. These two supervised the group of performers, while coordinating their actions with the security chief Yanukovych Kobzar and the security officer Bernatsky. ( *Both remained in Russia. - *O. M. )

- Yanukovych asked in the Kremlin Council about his own relocation on the peninsula? Where is the president, that is, legal power, there is the capital. Turn to the nation, give the command to suppress the rebellion in Kyiv with the help of Russian weapons ...

- We have certain information, I have no right to disclose the details - the investigation continues. All I can say: Yanukovych made decisions not on his own initiative. If he was going to just escape from a mythical threat, he would have done it from Kharkov. The chairman of the Duma Committee on International Relations of Pushkov came to the failed congress of the Southeast, there was the head of the similar committee of the Margelov Council, a number of governors from the regions of Russia. He rose with them to the diplomatic side - and no one would touch.

Speaking about Russia's intervention in the events in Ukraine, it is necessary to highlight an important circumstance. Yanukovych did not stay in Donetsk, his estate, but flew to the Crimea. Because from February 18, from the first blood on the Maidan, he already followed the instructions for the script that was imposed on him.

Maidan's Night of the Sturk: ​​Meetings, Calls

- Until now, I believed that the main person holding Yanukovych on the Russian course was Medvedchuk. ( *Viktor Medvedchuk - head of the Ukrainian Choice organization, supporter of federalization of the country, Kum Putin. - *O. M.) and Surkov as an emissary coordinated precisely with him plans for Ukraine. And you say, Surkov met, except Yanukovych, only with Akhmetov ...

- No, not only with Akhmetov. Surkov actively contacted Oleg Tsarevm, one of the ideologists of the Novorossia project, with the acting Prime Minister of Ukraine Sergei Arbuzov, with businessman Sergey Kurchenko, with the former chairman of the Crimean Council of Crimea Anatoly Mogilev and a number of people. But regarding contacts with Medvedchuk, we do not have information.

- During the video review, Yanukovych answered irritably "I do not remember!" To your question, whether he spoke with Putin on the eve of the tragic events on the Maidan. But in a commentary to the Ukrainian media, you claimed that the ex-president with certain Russian subscribers was recorded. Where is confidence? Under the sofa of Yanukovych lay the recorder of the new Major Melnichenko?

- Everything is easier. Yanukovych had numbers known to a narrow circle of faces. We established them in the investigation and reliably proved the belonging of Yanukovych. From them he talked, in particular, with Medvedchuk, who at the same time used mobile phones of Russian communications operators.

By communication with Putin. We do not know the phone of the President of the Russian Federation, of course. But there is special communications where the calls are fixed. Therefore, it was reliably established that on the night of February 18 to February 19, Yanukovych spoke twice in special communications with Putin, who accidentally “visited” the Azarov in these hours. According to our information, Putin and Azarov were in one of the residences of the President of Russia, located between Moscow and Peter. In turn, Yanukovych was on Bankova, in the building of the administration of the President of Ukraine. He also received visitors - leaders of the opposition Yatsenyuk, Klitschko and Tyagnibok.

- And in their presence did he talk?

- No, left the room. They said that they suggest: it was Putin. And the investigation reliably established that Yanukovych talked precisely with Putin, the timing of conversations is also known.

- For what articles of the Criminal Code of Ukraine will the correspondence accusations of Yanukovych, except for the state treason? What does each of the accusations at the time of conclusion?

- Regarding the incorporation of absenteeism, it is wrong to predict now. It is better to talk about what has already taken place. In the Maidan case, Yanukovych is charged with the organization of intentional murders under aggravating circumstances, Article 115, part 2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. This article has already been punished in the form of life imprisonment. He is also suspected of creating criminal organizations, Article 255, organizing the excess of power by law enforcement officials, Article 365, and a number of other crimes.

Kyiv