MOSCOW, April 16 (RAPSI) - The Prosecutor General’s Office and the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation have received complaints about the unreliability of the forensic examination on the assessment of the market value of 49% participation interest in Yurpromconsulting LLC, and a statement on initiation of a criminal case against the investigators.
Both appeals are related to the episode in the high-profile case against FSB Lieutenant Colonel Kirill Cherkalin, the victims in which are businessmen Igor Tkach and Sergey Glyadelkin.
Position of defense
"The essence of the complaint is simple. The investigation had the company's accounting and financial statements, but did not hand them over to forensic experts. They did not take into account any debts of the company, overestimating its value, in a such extent that the resulting negative value became positive. To reach the estimate of 600 million, the experts were also not being given a loan agreement for 1.9 billion rubles ($60,9 million on the valuation date), the debt under which is reflected in the company's accounting and financial statements, as well as in many other independently available documents. Taking into account just this debt makes the company's value negative: not plus 637 million rubles as experts believe, but less than minus 637 million rubles," says attorney Viktoria Burkovskaya of 'Egorov, Puginsky, Afanasiev and Partners' bureau.
She draws attention to the fact that the criminal case for the 12 billion rubles (about $187,5 million on the date of arrest) found in Cherkalin’s apartment was not even initiated.
"Introducing himself in court as deputy chairman of the board of directors of 'Avenue Management' company, Igor A. Tkach had failed to mention the fact that he had been one of the key public officials of the construction authorities of the Moscow Government for 3 years and has managed on a co-investment agreement between Moscow Government and Yurpromconsulting on behalf of the city for more than 2 years. In relation to Tkach, petitions had been also sent to the Prosecutor's Office of Moscow and the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation for Moscow area in order to initiate criminal proceedings against him in connection with his secret participation in the commercial activities and management of various companies,(non disclosure and conflict of interest), while he held senior positions in the Government of Moscow, including in Ecostok LLC, which owned 49% participation interest in Yurpromconsulting.
Now, according to SPARK Interfax, 'Avenue Management' company has debts for the payment of taxes for over 13 million rubles, on 13 enforcement proceedings on unpaid tax bills, and operations on its accounts have been suspended by the Federal Tax Service. The company is owned by Glyadelkin and Tkach. After leaving the public civil service in the summer of 2011, Tkach, according to the Austria company registry, acquired 27% share in Glyadelkin's Avenue Holding GmbH, net assets of which exceeded 100 million euro, for just 50 thousand euro. The growth of the company's net assets from almost zero to 100 million coincides with the period of Tkach's public civil service," the attorney claims.
In 2009, the Moscow Government decided to terminate the urban development project in the Levoberezhny microdistrict, in which Yurpromconsulting participated as one of the co-investors. At the end of November 2011, the Russian Parliament has adopted a law on the immunity of the City of Moscow under the any contracts with the city before January 1, 2011, according to which the recovery of damages from the city in case of termination of co-investment or investment contracts with the city became completely impossible.
In addition to the bribe of 850,000 US dollars, Cherkalin is charged with involvement in fraudulent actions, which the investigation considers to be providing Glyadelkin and Tkach with deliberately false information "that unknown officials of the Mayor's Office are aiming to stop the investment project of Yurpromconsulting" in January 2011, and based thereon recommended to sell the pledged 49% participation interest in the company that were a security for a loan of 1.9 billion rubles. The investigation never established who these officials were.
The project was managed by Mosnadzor as the legal successor of the Department of Investment Construction Programs of Moscow. In 2008, due to changes in the Russian Budget Code, the centralized investment budget fund of Moscow, which financed the project, was liquidated, there were changes in the land laws and regulations, and non-competitive allocation of land plots for construction with participation of private companies has become impossible. Therefore, the city had no legal grounds to proceed with the project, which was stated in numerous administrative acts of the Moscow Government.
Cherkalin's confessionary statements that Glyadelkin was allegedly threatened with a criminal case against him were not confirmed, this hypothesis was not included in the pre-trial agreement, and was excluded from the indictment. Since Glyadelkin was a participant in the sting operation of the FSB, accordingly, he could not be brought to criminal liability.