Khodorkovsky & Lebedev Communications Center

Morning session:

Although today was the first day that the prosecution was to begin presenting evidence, Mr. Shokhin began by making a motion to halt all video recording of the proceedings. According to Mr. Shokhin: "Video recording should not occur, because it will negatively impact on witness testimony, by allowing them to follow the process. This would be a direct violation of the law." Judge Danilkin had to clarify what exactly the prosecution was asking - prohibit reporters from filming the monitors that are in the press room, or to turn off the video feed completely. Not surprisingly, Mr. Shokhin asked for the video feed to be completely turned off. The judge, without giving a chance for defendants and their defense attorneys to voice their objections, pressed a button - and the video feed was gone. He did allow that at some point in the future he may revisit the issue.

Journalists were forced to migrate into the already full courtroom. The court's press coordinator attempted to sort the journalists by allowing only one member from each press agency, newspaper or radio station to remain in the courtroom. Journalists could be heard commenting that the prosecution finally realized that publicity is not working in their favor, that the openness is about to come to an end, and that the government is beginning to put up roadblocks to their reporting on the trial.

After the members of the press who were able to get into the courtroom were seated, the defense began by objecting to the way that the court allowed the prosecution to interrupt defendants during the previous two days. Mr. Khodorkovsky objected to the way Ms. Ibragimova attempted during the two previous hearings to limit his right to express his opinion. Mr. Khodorkovsky told the judge that his attempts to limit Mr. Khodorkovsky's ability to comment amounted to nothing less than abrogation of Mr. Khodorkovsky's right to defend himself.

2009.04.23. Statement of objection concerning not being able to trestify prior to prosecution >>

2009.04.23. Statement of objections to actions of presiding judge >>

2009.04.23. Statement on Ibragimova's comments >>

Further, Mr. Khodorkovsky was indignant that the prosecution objected so strenuously to his wish to have his testimony taken prior to prosecutions' case. Mr. Khodorkovsky told the court that he is ready to testify and to answer any questions that the court may pose to him. The prosecutions' objection is nothing more than a continuation of a long-practiced tactic of refusing to acknowledge the existence of widely available documents, of not explaining the indictment, and will likely continue in their presentation of their side of the case. Mr. Khodorkovsky said, "The prosecution is not prepared to oppose clear and simple facts. Anything that the prosecution attempts to deny me the ability to say will become public by other means."

Next, Mr. Krasnov was ready to present defense's motion concerning the removal of Mr. Lakhtin and Mr. Shokhin as prosecutors in this process. In their motion, the defense provided, word for word, a petition by Antonio Valdes-Garcia, a Spanish national and former YUKOS executive. Mr. Valdes-Garcia described threats, blackmail and torture inflicted upon him, with the intention of forcing him to provide false testimony against Mr. Khodorkovsky and Mr. Lebedev. Mr. Khodorkovsky, in support of the motion, reminded that Judge that Mr. Lakhtin is on the proposed defense witness list, and should not be present during the court hearing. Further, Mr. Khodorkovsky explained that all of the prosecutions' mistakes, half- and un-truths, cannot be explained by simple negligence, but by a complete failure to remain impartial, and by having a personal, not just a professional, stake in seeing Mr. Khodorkovsky and Mr. Lebedev convicted on new charges.

Afternoon session:

The afternoon session began with Mr. Lebedev confirming his support for the motion to remove Mr. Lakhtin and Mr. Shokhin from prosecuting the case. With his trademark sarcasm, Mr. Lebedev lamented, that although both prosecutors have done so much to ensure his and Mr. Khodorkovsky's acquittal, and as "the defense we should fully take advantage of such prosecutors," Mr. Lakhtin and Mr. Shokhin should be removed.

Further, Mr. Lebedev, again, explained why the whole indictment is simply "schizophrenic." In his words, the prosecution is unable to decide, even amongst them, exactly what they are accusing Mr. Lebedev and Mr. Khodorkovsky of: First the oil was stolen, than the oil was exported - and thus laundered.

Mr. Lebedev concluded: "If we are fighting for justice, I want this court to be a temple. I want those who represent the law, when they come here, to know the law. That is why, Your Honor, I am fighting for your honor." Mr. Lebedev offered the judge an opportunity to consider his statement as a petition to acknowledge a commission of a crime by the prosecution. Mr. Khodorkovsky signed Mr. Lebedev's statement.

Mr. Shokhin began his reply by stating that the process has to remain open, and that he has no objection to journalists covering the trial - to the contrary - their presence in the courtroom only increases his respect for them. Concerning the defense's motion to remove him from the case, Mr. Shokhin stated that he has no improper motive for prosecuting the case, and the defense has no cause to ask for his removal.

Ms. Ibragimova defended her colleagues. She said that defense did not provide any sound reasons to remove Mr. Shokhin or Mr. Lakhtin. Then, Ms. Ibragimova went after the audience. "It seems that those present here - and I don't mean journalists - with their sighing and their looks always ‘correctly' react [to what is said here]. It's as if they come to work here. That is why we see the defense turn to the audience during their statements."

Mr. Lakhtin thought it necessary to add that neither his official rank nor his financial position improved since the first trial. "Neither my official nor material position has changed in anyway since I started supervising the Yukos case in 2003. I have the same position, and I am participating in this trial on the orders of those who outrank me." He continued that his opinion of Mr. Khodorkovsky and Mr. Lebedev does not come from objectivity, but from their deeds and what the courts say they did.

Concerning Mr. Vlades-Garcia, Mr. Lakhtin assured everyone present that Mr. Valdes-Garcia's injuries were a result of alcohol abuse, and nothing more. Those familiar with Mr. Valdes-Garcia's case were left to wonder how he, while being in "witness protection," managed to get his hands on and consume so much alcohol so as to cause himself the injuries that defense described in their motion. Mr. Lakhtin even remembered Vasiliy Aleksanyan, stating that no court has ever found his actions in the case to be illegal.

The hearing was adjourned until 11:30 on Friday, April 24. Judge Danilkin is expected to rule on the defense's motion to remove Mr. Lakhtin and Mr. Shokhin.