On the 7th of October, 2009 at the meeting with writers the Prime Minister of Russia Vladimir Putin made another statement about «the complicity of YUKOS Company in murders» that «has been proved by the court».

Vladimir Putin expressed an opinion that «while mentioning him [Mikhail Khodorkovsky] and other defendants of the case, it is important to bear in mind that they were involved in people’s murders… this was proved by the court», — PRIME-TASS information agency quoted the words of Dmitriy Peskov, the Press Secretary of the Head of the Government.

Vladimir Putin also named a condition, on which a grant of pardon to the ex-manager of Yukos would be possible. «Such a possibility is stipulated by the law. However to be able to use this right a convicted should fully plead guilty and file an appropriate request».

But the complicity of Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Platon Lebedev in the murders has not been proved by the court, moreover, they have never been charged with it. In both their cases, the first and the second ones, only economic crimes were mentioned. Meanwhile, the judicial inquiry into the second case in the Khamovnichesky regional court of Moscow is far from completed.

Meanwhile, it is not the first time when Vladimir Putin expresses his opinion in such a manner. He had already made a similar statement in the second half of 2003, after the arrest of Alexey Pichugin and Platon Lebedev. Mikhail Khodorkovsky was free at that time.

While responding to foreign journalists’ questions Vladimir Putin declared that «it is not only about economic cases, there were murder cases as well». He had told the same even before the trial started.

«Like the [then] president of Russia could know what it was about and what it would come to, at the moment the inquest had just started?» – Leonid Nevzlin, the ex vice-president of the disgraced oil company commented on this in his interview he gave to me for my book called «No witness?»

«At that time they suspected [the head of Yukos security department Alexey] Pichugin only of the organization of the murder of the couple of Tambov businessmen] the Gorins. This case had no direct relation to Yukos at all. And the suspicion in relation to Pichugin arose only based on the fact that they were close friends with the Gorins… The sentence was predetermined in advance – prior to the arrest of Pichugin», — thinks Leonid Nevzlin.

Later, as we know, both Alexey Pichugin and Leonid Nevzlin were sentenced to a life term. Moreover, Leonid Nevzlin was sentenced in absence, which is an unprecedented case in the Russian court practice.

We can speak endlessly about the scope of gross violations of the law in these court proceedings. Both Alexey Pichugin, and false witnesses for his case and for the case of Leonid Nevzlin spoke about a severe pressure put on them by inquest bodies with the purpose of receiving evidence against Yukos.

Special reporter of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, who studied the Pichugin’s case, in her recent report called «Allegations of politically-motivated abuses of the criminal justice system in Council of Europe member states» expressed the opinion that «Mr Pichugin [as well as Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Platon Lebedev] may have also fallen victim to the unrelenting campaign against all those related to Yukos and its leading executives».

Complaints of Alexey Pichugin against the unjust sentence have been accepted for review by the European Court of human rights, and the first of them was communicated about two years ago. Leonid Nevzlin also expressed his intention to apply to Strasbourg.

The yesterday’s statement of Vladimir Putin makes us assume with regret that either his subordinates hide the actual state of affairs from their boss, or the prime minister of Russia deliberately ignores the current situation.

It should be added here that the procedure of pardon that is regulated by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated December 28, 2001 No. 1500 «About committees responsible for pardon granting issues at the territories of the Russian Federation subjects», does not necessarily require that the convicted pleads guilty. The list of data that has to be provided by the penitentiary administration only mentions (section 5, item «z») a note stating the attitude of the person applying for a pardon to his crime.

Vera Vasilieva, HRO.org, October 8th, 2009