All news
"Bankruptcy, like death, cannot happen twice": Musin's lawyer found pseudo-damage in TFB case
"Bankruptcy cannot happen twice, like death": Mukhsin's lawyer found similar damage in TFB case
The 347 thousand Gazprom shares belonging to Lidiya Musina were again arrested.
The trial in the Vakhitovsky Court on the case of Robert Musin began yesterday almost an hour late. That is how much time it took the staff and technical services of the Kazan Pretrial Detention Center No. 1 to provide videoconferencing (VKS) with the participation of the convicted banker.
As it turned out later, the request sent by the court on October 11 was delivered to the bailiffs only on the 14th after repeated phone calls, and the magistrate's court blocked the communication channel with the renovated VKS room and brought the unrepaired one for consideration. In order to hold him accountable, the chairman of the case, Judge Yuri Arsenyuk, personally called the head of the pretrial detention center, Yevgeny Ushakov, twice.
Please note that not a single recent hearing on this case has taken place without delays in connecting to the pretrial detention facility. The court decided on the defendant's participation via video conference several months ago. Joint replacement surgery allows the 60-year-old banker to move around on crutches, without the additional difficulties associated with moving around in a paddy wagon. For his health.
A representative of the interested parties, Lidiya Musina, unexpectedly showed up at the meeting. Andrei Kuzovenkov inserted his speech between the arguments of the prosecution, the victim, and the defense. He asked the court to take into account when passing the sentence that the property of the defendant's wife, who bears no responsibility for his actions, was confiscated in the case.
Kuzovenkov recalled: In September 2023, the court seized 50% of the shares of Analitika LLC, 30% of the shares of the Stary Druzhal company, 178.8 million shares and 9.7 thousand shares of the open-end mutual fund Ak Bars - Shares of Markets and Financial Instruments. Ordinary shares of the Transstroy Corporation. The representative did not disclose the value of these assets, but noted that they were seized as belonging to Robert Musin. In November 2020, the same Vakhitovsky court divided this property between the spouses, but Lidiya Musina received her husband's share in Analitika and all his investments in Ak Bars Shares, as well as shares and shares of Friend and Transstroy. Divided in half among the Musins.
At the same time, on September 25, 2024, the Vakhitovsky Court of Kazan prohibited Lidiya Musina from disposing of other parts of her property. These are 347.2 thousand shares of Gazprom and a quarter of the share of the authorized capital of National Corporation Arkon LLC. According to Realnoe Vremya's sources, the property was previously seized as part of a criminal case, but it was later overturned by the High Court and the materials were returned for consideration.
Now the decision to seize is being challenged again: the lawyer is proving his client's point of view and asking to cancel the seizure of assets after the verdict. If not, at least indicate a specific period of validity of the ban on registration actions.
When the judge gave the floor to Robert Musin, he delegated that authority. "Your Honor, I think my attorney will speak. We prepared together."
Alexey Klyukin has been defending the former head of Tatfondbank for over seven years, since March 3, 2017. On that day, Musin's banking license was revoked, the first criminal case was opened against Musin, and he appeared in court under arrest.
Klyukin's speech in yesterday's debate lasted almost an hour and a half. He expressed surprise at the prosecution's position. "He would never have thought that the minutes of a meeting of the credit committee, which he was not present at, could be evidence of the issuance of a loan. And I could not attend because I was not on the committee at the time."
At the end of the speech, the lawyer suggested that the court hold only 12 companies liable for issuing bad loans: Kazanskaya Selkhoztekhnika, Avtoparking, Aida i D, Audiotrade, Novaya Neftekhimiya, Audit Practice, and Medresurs. Region, Tekhnologiya Plus, Tekhnoregion, TK Sputnik, and Travers Company) for a total of 4,055,000,000,423,00854 rubles 47 kopecks. Seven of these organizations were part of the DOMO group of companies, the beneficiary of which, according to the first decision of 2021, was recognized as Musin. The companies remaining on the list are directly related to the current defendants, which the former chairman of the TFB board himself does not deny.
Klyukin asked his clients to lend these 12 companies "a certain amount of compensation for damages qualified under Part 1 of Article 201 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (abuse of power in a commercial organization) and to prosecute them under this article. The case will be terminated upon expiration of the statute of limitations <6 years> (<December 2022>)." He also said that the civil claims for 26.7 billion rubles filed by the DIA and the prosecutor's office in this case cannot be satisfied and these claims must be recalculated taking into account the decisions of the arbitration court and the circumstances established during the process.
The lawyer also indicated that all transactions on the so-called unequal replacement of assets in the amount of 9.7 billion rubles and demands for an additional 1.25 billion dollars upon withdrawal of the collateral should be excluded from the subject of the claim.
At the last hearing, TFB participant Konstantin Golovko, represented by state prosecutor Elena Petrova and the representative of the victims, DIA, stated that all three sections of the indictment were fully proven by the seizure of collateral. A total of 15.6 billion rubles were exchanged for good assets for bad assets and bad loans of up to 35 companies. The prosecutor's office insisted on punishing Mushin with 9 years of imprisonment under Article 2. 201 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (abuse of power by commercial organizations entails grave consequences, including failure to fulfill creditors' demands, cancellation of licenses and bankruptcy), the final punishment is assigned in the form of the first imprisonment for a term of 16 years. General regime colony Combined; Golovko supported the aforementioned term.
"Even more surprising is the prosecution's proposal to base the charges on the conclusions of the state company DIA, essentially on the subjective opinion of the injured party." Alexey Klyukin continued the discussion, highly appreciating Golovko's comments about their biased meaning. The decision of the Tatarstan arbitration court to hold Musin and other bank managers liable for their subsidiaries seems to have eliminated the need to evaluate the evidence and the parties' positions regarding the transactions and the amount of damages. - The court can only return to the deliberation room with this document and assign a punishment... But the term must be calculated precisely...
The lawyer reminded about the law that if the crimes are combined, the final sentence cannot exceed half of the maximum punishment for a serious crime. According to Part 2 of Article 201 of the Criminal Code, this maximum term is 10 years. Therefore, if the prosecution finds Mushin guilty of these two crimes, partial additions must be applied. Klyukin reprimanded the prosecutor. "10+5 is definitely not 16."
In addition, in his speech, the lawyer reported that more than 100 prosecution witnesses were questioned in this case, but a confrontation with the accused never took place. In other words, the Investigative Committee employees did not see a contradiction between Musin's words and others.
"So what are the grounds for questioning his specific and consistent testimony?" Alexey Klyukin reasoned. "This situation only strengthens the conviction that the charges are absurd... The investigators used as a screen the decision of the Bakitovsky Court of Kazan dated September 27, 2021, which secured all loans issued to the bank since January 2013. The decision was made to make So, the date of the criminal charges brought against my client is only the last part of this period.
According to the defendant and his lawyers, the security forces, having achieved a verdict on the episode with the lending to the DOMO group (once a large network for the sale of electronics at the federal level - editor's note), figuratively "handed over the rest." evidence and circumstances: "You can manage your credit portfolio without worrying about tracking it." For example, for companies not associated with mucin.
During interrogation, the former banker noted that the text of the indictment for the second case was similar to the first verdict. And he indicated the same page numbers in these two documents. "From my point of view, this is a copying of the same text!" said Klyukin, hinting at the clumsiness of the work. "The 33-page indictment lists 35 companies, of which only three were mentioned earlier in the text, since they figured in the first criminal case. The indictment does not mention a word about the remaining 32 companies. How they got there is a big question."
The definition of subsidies to bankers given by the AS Tatarstan is more precise. It describes two groups of companies. One is code-named "Electronics" (it lists seven corporate borrowers of the DMO group, all of which provide financial services to the company "Global Consulting"), and the other is "Financial Brokerage" (here general accounting is carried out by OOO "Accounting.ru"). For some reason, the director of the second accounting firm and several other witnesses from the second company of the group were not questioned by the Investigative Committee.
Klyukin claims that there is a second group that has nothing to do with Musin.
One of the DIA employees shook his head at these words...
— During the discussion, the victims’ representatives mentioned the testimony of former vice-presidents Tagirova and Nasyrov, who stated that they acted on Musin’s instructions. So, the question arises: If they did not know about the plan and acted only on instructions, why should they bear subsidiary liability? According to the Arbitration Court’s decision on the notorious bias of the DIA representatives, all members of the board, including four chairmen, were found guilty of the bank’s position. In the criminal case, under the same circumstances, only one of my clients is guilty of everything,” the banker’s senior lawyer stated.
According to him, Ramil Nasyrov’s testimony clearly shows that during interrogation he was defending himself against the DIA’s civil lawsuit.
Klyukin investigated each of the "non-Musin companies", noting that the lack of connection between them and the current defendants was pointed out to the Investigative Committee by Ilyin, the first head of the DIA, who was named a victim in 2009. In this case. At the same time, Ilyin most often reported on the connection between Tatfondbank and its employees with the credit companies of the financial intermediary group.
For example, with regard to Artug and ZAO Kreativ-Invest, the lawyer indicated, referring to the representative of the victim: "I am connected with the bank through I.A. Mingazetdinov. (Until 2015, he was the chairman of the board of directors of TFB, and then became a member of the board - editor's note). The manager of the bank's branch was also a beneficiary of the said JSC, but this did not prevent the investigation," the lawyer said.
As for the company "Aktivny Tsentr", he said that, according to Ilyin's testimony, it has no connection with Musin. At the same time, Klyukin agreed with the words of the current representative of the DIA, Konstantin Golovko. The founder of the company was Lomovtsev, who had previously worked as Musin's bodyguard. Klyukin emphasized that this was almost 10 years before the healthy era, after which, in 2009-2010, Lomovtsev headed the bank's debt collection department, where he reported to the head of the security service, and later his work was supervised by the deputy director. President Tagirova. "I reported to her about my work every week. He supervised 60 people, including employees of branches all over the country. The testimony does not say a word about the connection of "Aktiv-Tsentr" with Musin, or that Robert Renatovich was aware of his position in this company," the host emphasized.
He also noted that the DIA and security officials unfairly labeled a number of companies as "technological borrowers." Among them are the Triumph group of companies, whose solid land assets of the victim are still of interest, and ZAO TPK Agrotrade, a company with billion-dollar turnover, a major agricultural producer, and once the founder of a private airline. Novaya Neftekhimiya, based in Musinsk, was once entrusted by the Central Bank and the DIA to participate in the reorganization of Timer Bank, as well as Timer Bank.
Klyukin recalled the emphasis in the prosecutor's speech: The deals Musin is accused of were not the subject of investigation in his first case. He does not dispute this. The deals are different, but their serious consequences are the same.
— The revocation of the license, bankruptcy and subsequent liquidation of the corporation (i.e. the death of an individual in the physical sense) cannot happen twice. Therefore, in this case, it cannot be separately recognized that Mushin's actions, when he was already convicted, regardless of the amount of damage, led to the same result," the lawyer explained the defense's position and expressed arguments in favor of mitigating the sentence. Fees under Article 201 of the Civil Code.
Also at the conference, the lawyer said that the allegations of unfair bail termination were not supported by evidence. In one transaction, there was no evidence that neither the document itself nor a copy of it was included. ingredient. In another transaction, a photocopy of the bail termination agreement was confirmed to have been signed. "This is something new in the practice of presenting evidence of eligibility," Klyukin said. "I have never seen this anywhere else," he noted.
The defense insisted on conducting an investigation to determine the market value of all assets that were allegedly overvalued, but the investigation commission refused. Klyukin believes that "the structure of the prosecution will be destroyed." During the discussion, he cited in detail the testimony of former deputy chairman of TFB Vadim Merzlyakov, who oversaw the stock trading. During the interrogation, he said that the DIA initially confirmed the balance sheet value of the received shares and did not classify them as "technological assets," but a year after the completion of the transaction, the state company made "adjustments" and the price was overstated by 2.9 times. Merzlyakov noted: Such adjustments are unacceptable. The situation must be assessed at the time of the transaction. He also recalled that the DIA had previously accepted these same shares as collateral for loans from Timer Bank and that they were highly liquid.
Klyukin told the court: The high value of the shares was confirmed by the appraisal report of March 20, 2020, which assessed the land of the Ak Bars Gorizont fund, bordering and located on the land of ZAO TFB Rentny. In the same area. At the time of consideration of the transactions, closed areas of mutual funds in three districts near Kazan were in the process of being transferred from agricultural land to villages in the manner agreed upon by the authorities of the republic. The goal is to increase the liquidity of this asset and increase its leverage in terms of financial recovery of the stock exchange. And the appraisal at the end of the transaction was carried out taking into account the future state allowed in such cases.
The defense attorney saved Trump's arguments for last. According to him, in the bankruptcy case, the DIA lawyers sought to challenge all stock exchange transactions involving Moscow Credit and RGS Bank. "And on all counts, the injured party refused to testify. In other words, it ultimately decided to leave my client's assets in the bank. "This was tactfully kept silent during this process," the attorney shared in his speech, attaching a table with data on arbitration decisions. "I believe that the civil lawsuit related to this is also illegal and unfounded. They chose the land package. And now they are asking me to recover damages from the customer."
A sentencing date has not yet been set for this case.