Courtroom Update: July 2, 2009
Today marks six years since Platon Lebedev was placed under arrest.
Prior to the morning session the courtroom was full - mostly with young people. Upon further inquiry it was discovered that they are law students who are taking their summer internship at the Khamovnicheskiy Court, with Chief Judge Viktor Danilkin. Judge Danilkin told them that he did not mind if they wanted to sit in on one of his hearings, plus they would get a chance to see an interesting defendant - Mikhail Khodorkovsky. When asked about their first impressions of what they observed during the morning session, the interns had varied opinions: One student commented that at least they knew that prosecution could read; another was miffed as to why the judge did not react to defense's objections. Another student thought otherwise - the judge was diligently noting objections in the court record. The students agreed that it was difficult to form an opinion, but conceded that it was not a comfortable environment, but a strained one.
Today, the prosecution spent the entire hearing reading about contracts involving three companies: Evoil, Fargoil and Energotrade, first one the seller and last two the purchasers of oil produced by five companies: Yuganskneftegaz, Samaraneftegaz, Tomskneft, Tomsk-Petroleum-und-Gaz, and Benodet Investments Ltd. Notably, as both Mr. Lebedev and defense attorneys Mr. Miroshnichenko and Ms. Terehova would continue to point out, neither Tomsk-Petroleum-und-Gaz nor Benodet Investments Ltd. appear anywhere in the indictment, nor are they parties to the case as civil complainants. Also, as the defense would continue to remind the court, most of these contracts were executed after Mr. Lebedev was arrested on July 2nd, 2003. Other contracts were executed after Mr. Khodorkovsky was arrested on October 25th, 2003, with Mr. Lebedev having been under arrest for nearly almost four months.
Morning session:
While a hissing and popping noise came from the courtroom's speakers, the prosecution resumed reading documents from Volume 94 of the case materials. The entire volume consisted of contracts for the sale of oil and acts of transfer conducted between Evoil and Fargoil. Mr. Lakhtin, in his monotonous style, plowed through nearly all of the 2003 contracts between the two companies.
Mr. Lebedev was the first to inform the presiding judge that there was a problem - namely relevance of some of the documents - with what Mr. Lakhtin was reading. The documents consisted of contracts, based on a previously concluded general agreement, and acts of transfer accompanying each of the contracts. Under each contract, Evoil would sell a certain volume of oil, produced by one of the five aforementioned companies, to Fargoil. But, as Mr. Lebedev pointed out, neither Tomsk-Petroleum-und-Gaz nor Benodet Investments Ltd. were ever mentioned in the indictment, yet Mr. Lakhtin persisted in reading contracts where Evoil was selling oil "obtained from the resources of [company name]." Further, Mr. Lebedev noted that neither one of these two companies is a civil complainant or is alleged to be a victim by the prosecution. The obvious question was - how were these contracts relevant to the charges against the defendants? Judge Danilkin noted Mr. Lebedev's query in the record, but Mr. Lakhtin continued to read documents, often with added emphasis, where Tomsk-Petroleum-und-Gaz and Benodet Investments Ltd. were prominently featured.
Mr. Miroshnichenko took over from Mr. Lebedev, and continued to point out to the court that neither Tomsk-Petroleum-und-Gaz nor Benodet Investments Ltd. have anything to do with the case. Before Mr. Lakhtin began reading the last document in Volume 94, Mr. Miroshnichenko asked the court for permission to make a short statement (eliciting murmurs of disapproval from the prosecution), which the court allowed. Here is what Mr. Miroshnichenko told the court:
"On July 2nd, 2003, exactly six years ago, [Mr. Lebedev] was detained and placed under guard. A significant part of the documents in this volume, which the prosecution read, specifically relates to that period when [Mr. Lebedev] was in detention. At the same time, the actions of which Mr. Lebedev is accused which are directly related to these documents are alleged to have taken place through the use of [his] official position."
After Mr. Miroshnichenko sat down, there were scattered laughs and a hand-clap.
Mr. Lakhtin, oblivious to the absurdity of the situation, concluded the last page in Volume 94, and the hearing was adjourned for a one-hour break.
Afternoon session:
In many respects the afternoon part of the hearing mirrored the morning one. Only, this time, it was Volume 95 and, after about 30 pages of contracts and acts of transfer, Energotrade replaced Fargoil as the counter-party to Evoil.
In the afternoon, it was Ms. Terehova who stood up and told the court that the document which Mr. Lakhtin just read was executed on November 21, 2003, when Messrs. Khodorkovsky and Lebedev were under arrest. A few minutes later, seeing that the prosecution did not find the timeline issue to be of importance, Ms. Terehova stood up and told the court that all of the documents being read were executed after July 2nd and October 25th of 2003, after Messrs. Lebedev and Lebedev, respectively, were placed under arrest. She asked the court to note it in the record, so that defense attorneys would not have to repeat the same objection over and over.
After Mr. Lakhtin read a general agreement between Evoil and Energotrade, Mr. Terehova informed the court that Mr. Lakhtin omitted sections 4 through 8 of the agreement, and only partially read section 10. The objection was noted, and Mr. Lakhtin resumed.
At exactly 16:00, Ms. Kovalihina, surprising the attendees, told the court "That's it for today," and, as if by prior agreement, Judge Danilkin adjourned the hearing. Mr. Shokhin was observed hurrying into the prosecution's room, then leaving the courthouse in even more haste.
The trial will resume at 10:00 on Friday, July 3, 2009.