Khodorkovsky & Lebedev Communications Center

The trial resumed at 11:30, as another group of Spetsnaz guards was placed into Messrs. Khodorkovsky and Lebedev's convoy.

Mr. Khodorkovsky asked the court to allow him to make a statement which he was planning to make yesterday. He began by telling the court that he did not mean to embarrass Ms. Dmitriyeva by pointing out some if the activities that were standard for persons in her position. Mr. Khodorkovsky explained that he was thrown off by the case of selective amnesia that affected the witness's testimony. Nevertheless, he apologized for a lapse in decorum.

Next, Mr. Khodorkovsky went on to tell the court that Ms. Dmitriyeva's testimony lacked any relevance. That was due to the fact that, as soon as it was established that YUKOS owned 100% of Tomskneft's shares, none of the transactions Tomskneft entered after 2001 were subject to prosecution's reinterpretation of whether they coincided with Tomskneft's interests.

Mr. Khodorkovsky noted that Ms. Ibragimova's insistence, while questioning Ms. Dmitriyeva, that Tomskneft's loan agreement with YUKOS Capital S.a.r.l. violated the Civil Code because both sides were controlled by YUKOS, was a clear misunderstanding of the Federal Law on Corporations. Otherwise, Ms. Ibragimova was placing in doubt not only all transactions within any vertically integrated company, but also between any government-controlled entities, such as Gazprom and Russian Railways. Mr. Khodorkovsky speculated that Ms. Ibragimova's misunderstanding stemmed from inability to analyze critically the cheat sheets from which she was reading her questions.

Mr. Khodorkovsky pointed out that, despite a line of witnesses, including Ms. Dmitriyeva and Mr. Zaitsev, who are unable to remember the financial results from crude oil sales during the time frame of the charges, the court continues to cover for the Investigative Committee, which is in possession of Yuganskneftegaz, Samaraneftegaz and Tomskneft financial statements and refuses to allow defense to enter these financial statements into evidence. "The reason is simple - the results are positive, there wasn't a direct harm, the charges are fictitious, the investigators know that. I don't think the court should offer its support to help them conceal these documents," Mr. Khodorkovsky explained.

Mr. Khodorkovsky told the court that out of all production subsidiaries only Tomskneft had overall negative results - in 2002 and 2003 - and only because of putting into operation [the Luginetskaya Gas Compression Station], with pre-planned below-cost gas sales to Gazprom.

Mr. Khodorkovsky informed the court that he thought it was enabling witnesses with experience in accounting to avoid testifying about embezzlement by arguing that "embezzlement" was a legal concept and they - like Mr. Zaitsev yesterday - are not trained jurists. Mr. Khodorkovsky noted that "embezzlement" is used by jurists and accountants alike, just as it is used in the Criminal Code and the Federal Law on Accounting. According to Mr. Khodorkovsky, finance and accounting professionals should answer questions about "embezzlement," just as they answer prosecution's questions containing terms like "ownership rights," "property," "contract" and others.

Mr. Lebedev told the court that Ms. Ibragimova, when questioning Ms. Dmitriyeva, mislead the court by stating that proceedings concerning YUKOS Capital S.a.r.l.'s loan to Tomskneft took place in Netherlands. Mr. Lebedev noted that prosecution continued to exhibit a deplorable lack of knowledge of facts and circumstances they themselves allege.

He went on to explain the information contained in the decision and assured the court that defense was ready to offer a notarized copy of the decision as soon as the court offered defense an opportunity to do so. Mr. Lebedev noted that the prosecution was ignorant of the substance of decisions analogous to the one in YUKOS Capital against Tomskneft, because decisions from the courts in Moscow, London, Paris, Amsterdam, New York and others were absent from the case materials.

Judge Danilkin asked the prosecution if they were ready to call the next witness. The ensuing silence prompted the court to ask Mr. Lakhtin directly. Mr. Lakhtin told the court that the witness did not show up and prosecution did not have anyone to question today.

Judge Danilkin informed the parties that on March 3 he received a letter from Ms. Natalya Petrosyan, who informed the court that she was now living in Germany with her son, who was seriously ill, and would not be able to able to come in to testify. [Ms. Petrosyan was an associate at ALM-Feldmans. -Eds.] Ms. Petrosyan asked for her interrogation transcripts, which she preemptively affirmed, to be entered into evidence.

After a five minute break Judge Danilkin asked if there were any motions. Prosecution remained quite. Judge Danilkin began announcing that the trial was being adjourned until Monday, when he was interrupted by Mr. Lakhtin, who told the court that prosecution would ask to announce Ms. Petrosyan's transcripts.

Mr. Rivkin objected, telling the court that the circumstances in Ms. Petrosyan's letter were not enumerated in the Criminal Procedure Code for determining the witness's unavailability - the witness's death, his illness, being a foreign citizen or being a victim of a natural disaster.

Mr. Khodorkovsky told the court that the reading of interrogation transcripts without calling the witness in to testify violated defendants' rights, because defendants do not have an opportunity to ask their questions. For example, investigators never asked Ms. Petrosyan whether she acted for the benefit of some organized criminal group or for the benefit of YUKOS. That would be the question, should Ms. Petrosyan was called in to testify, the defense would be asking. As it was, defense was being denied an opportunity to ask this question.

Mr. Lebedev told the court that, should it decide to grant prosecution's motions, he would ask the reading take place on Monday.

Mr. Lakhtin's motion was granted, but the trial was adjourned until Monday to give Mr. Lebedev, who's been fighting a cold, a chance to get better.

The trial will resume on Monday, March 15, 10:30 Moscow Time.