Courtroom Report: February 24, 2010
The prosecution called to the witness stand Mr. Gitas Anilionis. Mr. Anilionis, who knew Mr. Lebedev since they worked together for the USSR Ministry of Geology, began his business career as Mr. Lebedev's deputy at MENATEP, but was soon appointed to manage SP RTT. In the courtroom, Mr. Anilionis introduced himself as General Director of OOO Lion XXI. [Mr. Anilionis figured prominently during testimony of other prosecution witnesses, including Messrs. Kraynov, Khvostikov, Gulin, Zakharov and Koval. -Eds.]
Mr. Lakhtin spent most of the morning session questioning Mr. Anilionis about events that took place prior to 1998, including the privatization of YUKOS and VNK. Mr. Anilionis testified that SP RTT was a secretarial firm providing company registration services, along with accounting, financial and consulting services. Mr. Anilionis confirmed that SP RTT employees served as directors for companies registered by SP RTT. Bank MENATEP was one of SP RTT's main clients.
Mr. Lakhtin proceeded to show Mr. Anilionis documents from the case materials. Beginning with pages from Mr. Kraynov's 1997 daily planner, defense would voice objections to most of the case materials being shown to the witness. In addition to the daily planner circa 1997, defense objected to the prosecutor's attempt at having Mr. Anilionis decipher Mr. Kraynov's daily entries.
After a short break, Mr. Anilionis testified that SP RTT provided registration services for YUKOS-Moscow, YUKOS-RM and YUKOS-EP. He confirmed that requests to register these companies came from someone at YUKOS, but he did not remember from whom. Mr. Anilionis remembered that these companies had management functions.
After questions about OOO AKRA, which initially held a small block of shares in MFO MENATEP, and despite objections by the defense, Mr. Lakhtin was allowed to question Mr. Anilionis on YUKOS' privatization. Mr. Lakhtin's further questions on pre-1998 events prompted new objections from Mr. Krasnov. The prosecutor interrupted the defense counsel in mid-sentence, which prompted an admonition from the court about not interrupting the opposing side.
However, Mr. Lakhtin would not back away from questions rooted in events that took place in 1995 and 1996. Answering Mr. Lakhtin's question about who owned the majority of YUKOS shares during that period, Mr. Anilionis named Mr. Kraynov and Mr. Anilionis. This answer did not satisfy Mr. Lakhtin, so he asked who owned Bank MENATEP. Mr. Anilionis, finally getting the gist of Mr. Lakhtin's questions, replied that he was aware that Mr. Khodorkovsky and others controlled the bank.
Mr. Lakhtin questioned Mr. Anilionis about VNK's ownership structure after it was privatized. Mr. Anilionis, looking at a table of VNK shareholders, testified that he knew the company names, but did not know how it was decided how many shares each company purchased. Mr. Anilionis, asked about loans made by Bank MENATEP for the acquisition of VNK, told the court that he definitely did not have anything to say about that topic.
Mr. Lakhtin's questions about VNK's privatization and subsequent events were interspersed with showing of various documents. As was often the case, Mr. Lakhtin had to announce the document before showing it to the witness, because the prosecution failed to enter into record all the evidence during the five months it spent reading documents from the case materials.
Mr. Anilionis did not remember whether he participated in all VNK shareholders meetings, but told the court that votes could be made in absentia. Mr. Anilionis explained that SP RTT would get a packet of documents, describing proposed agenda items, as well as instructions on whether his and other SP RTT employees' presence was required. According to Mr. Anilionis, all voting instructions came from Mr. Gololobov. Mr. Anilionis testified that he heard there was an exchange of VNK subsidiaries' shares, but he did not know all the details.
Mr. Lakhtin, not shying away from using leading questions, asked how SP RTT may have been connected to Baltic Petroleum and South Petroleum. Mr. Anilionis vaguely remembered that someone, probably from Mr. Lebedev's office, asked SP RTT to acquire a couple of companies. Mr. Lakhtin was unsatisfied with "from Mr. Lebedev's office" and wanted to know where the initiative came from. Understanding Mr. Lakhtin's hint, Mr. Anilionis testified that all initiatives originated with Messrs. Khodorkovsky, Lebedev, Brudno and Nevzlin.
For the rest of the hearing Mr. Lakhtin's questions focused on the aforementioned two companies and Behles Petroleum. Numerous documents, including crude oil contracts, were announced and entered into record. The defense was objecting continuously, both to the lack of authenticating attributes - even the prosecution's "True Copy" stamps were missing - and to incorrect and, often, incomplete translations by Ms. Zueva and unknown translators.
Mr. Lakhtin wanted to know who was in charge of managing the aforementioned companies' funds. Mr. Anilionis testified that it was Messrs. Maruyev, Moskalets and Leonovich, among others. Mr. Lakhtin asked whether Mr. Lebedev was involved, but Mr. Anilionis did not know, telling the court that he remembered that Mr. Lebedev worked at YUKOS for some period of time, then left.
After an examination of Baltic Petroleum's financial statements and auditor's report for 1999, Mr. Khodorkovsky asked the court to notice that despite a turnover of close to $731 million USD, the company's profit was approximately $22 million USD, or close to 3%. Mr. Khodorkovsky anticipated an interesting conversation on the topic of embezzlement.
Mr. Anilionis described a sequence of trading, whereby YUKOS sold to Behles Petroleum, then Behles Petroleum sold to South Petroleum and Baltic Petroleum. According to Mr. Anilionis, everyone at YUKOS - management, treasury and shareholders - knew about profits made by the aforementioned companies and that dividend payments were made to those companies' shareholders.
The hearing was adjourned around 17:00, after Mr. Lakhtin asked for time to prepare additional questions for Mr. Anilionis. The trial was adjourned until Friday. [We hear that Judge Danilkin will set a rare hearing for this upcoming Saturday. -Eds.]
The trial will resume on Friday, February 26, 10:00 Moscow Time.