http://www.mk.ru/politics/2014/06/30/deputat-rudenskiy-zasudil-navalnogo.htmlToday at 3:30 p.m., the Lyublino District Court will hear a lawsuit filed against me by United Russia member Rudensky.
http://www.duma.gov.ru/structure/deputies/131170/
Honor, dignity, business reputation — Rudensky apparently discovered all of that ~~at his dacha~~ and now wants to defend it. From me.
This is the Kremlin riffraff’s new strategy: whereas before they pretended not to notice our investigations, now they run to court, the “judges” rubber-stamp rulings in their favor without even looking into the case, and the little cronies use these “court decisions” to block websites. Once the law banning the publication in blogs of “private life data” comes into force, this practice will become routine.
Since it’s impossible to prove anything in this “court,” and they barely let you say a word anyway (anyone who has been to hearings like this knows), we decided to publish a detailed explanation before each hearing on the subject of “why we are right.” Your opinion matters more to us than the “judge’s,” so we’re making our case to you and answering questions in the comments.
So,
It all started when, in November 2013, we published the investigation From the Ozero Dacha Cooperative to the Sosny Dacha Cooperative, in which we told the story of some very unusual dacha owners who do not like declaring their palace-and-park estates. Naturally, we were talking about senior United Russia figures: Sergei Neverov (secretary of the General Council of the United Russia party), Igor Rudensky (chairman of the State Duma Committee on Economic Policy), Nikolai Ashlapov (United Russia member, head of the Federal Agency for Special Construction, deputy minister of regional development), Sergei Prikhodko (deputy prime minister and head of the government staff), and Vyacheslav Volodin (first deputy chief of the presidential administration, member of the bureau of United Russia’s supreme council). You can read more about each of them here: http://dacha.fbk.info/
The United Russia members really did not like the fact that we told people about their undeclared palaces. Naturally, we sent a request to the State Duma asking for an inquiry and for the matter to be examined. But the inquiry — surprise! — was something no one wanted to conduct.
Instead, the United Russia members started writhing like snakes in a frying pan, lying even more, and getting tangled up in their own statements. Then they decided to simply shut the matter down by obtaining rulings from courts under their control.
Neverov was first — he filed a lawsuit to defend his “honor and dignity”. Now it’s Rudensky. Here is the text of his claim, in which he argues that he did not violate anti-corruption legislation and declared everything properly.
Here it is in simple terms, with documents:
Rudensky violated anti-corruption legislation and provided false information in his property declarations. Specifically, for several years Rudensky failed to declare plots of land in his possession. The first plot in the Sosny cooperative (8,213 sq. m) was purchased by Rudensky in April 2008 and registered in his own name.
He declared that one correctly. In 2013, for some reason, he split that plot into two — 6,921 and 1,292 sq. m — and declared them accordingly.
Another piece of land, measuring 2,966 sq. m and in fact used by Rudensky, was registered to the non-commercial partnership “Sosny” in November 2010. As can be seen in a satellite image dated May 7, 2010, the Sosny dacha partnership plot was connected to the plot officially owned by Rudensky.
Accordingly, Rudensky violated declaration rules in 2010 (twice), in 2011, and in 2012 by failing to list the 2,966 sq. m plot belonging to the Sosny dacha partnership. This plot is fenced off, construction is underway there, which means our United Russia deputy is in fact using this land and therefore was obliged to include it in his declaration.
Yet another piece of land, measuring 4,250 sq. m and encompassing Rudensky’s plot, is owned by businessman Shustenko, who in recent years has won state tenders worth more than 5 billion rubles (about US$145 million at the time).
Rudensky claims that he received no benefit in kind from businessman Shustenko. Yet a public official gets to use land on non-market terms, while the businessman leasing out that land somehow turns out to be the winner of numerous Moscow public utilities tenders. Shustenko’s plot, which we estimate at 4,250 sq. m (Rudensky says 4,300 sq. m), was effectively acquired by his company in early 2012, because in January he leased it from the state.
According to Rudensky and Neverov, they only began subleasing this plot in January 2013 — in other words, they are claiming that the plot leased for their use sat idle throughout all of 2012. Obviously, this is how they are trying to explain why the land was absent from the 2012 declaration.
In his statement, published on the Echo of Moscow website, Rudensky refers to a decision by the Sosny dacha partnership to improve the territory of the plot owned by the cooperative and divide it up with a fence accordingly: "As for the 2,996 sq. m plot of land owned by the Sosny dacha non-commercial partnership, in 2010 the members decided to carry out landscaping work, which was completed by the beginning of 2013. In February of that same year, a lease agreement was concluded between Sosny and me, and this will of course be reflected in my 2013 declaration."
The claim that the Sosny dacha partnership needed 2.5 years to “improve” a plot that was already perfectly well maintained, with no permanent structures or forest on it, is absurd.
In the same publication, Rudensky writes: “I started building the house in 2012. At this point it is just walls and a roof. Any lawyer knows that an unfinished structure cannot be declared as a completed property.”
About the house, he is right — no one disputes that. However, by making this statement, Rudensky unequivocally confirms that he began using the plots on which the house is being built in 2012. How can you build a house without using the land it stands on? *There is only one conclusion__: the information in the 2012 declaration is false*.
After ACF reviewed the contents of the “leak” published on the well-known Shaltai Boltai website, we became convinced that Rudensky’s violations of anti-corruption legislation are by no means limited to concealing real estate. The materials published there make it clear that this deputy’s lifestyle is incompatible with his official annual income of 2–2.5 million rubles (roughly US$58,000–72,000 at the time). For example, the estimated cost of the house on this plot was around 45 million rubles (about US$1.3 million at the time), which is 18 times the annual income declared by the deputy. Igor Nikolayevich also buys furniture and other interior items, each of which is comparable to his yearly salary.
And finally, about income in kind. The fact that such income was received is confirmed by the fact that in his 2013 declaration Rudensky listed Shustenko’s plot as being in his gratuitous use. The free use of something for which another person would otherwise have to pay rent is obviously a form of income. By analogy, this is similar to reimbursement of transportation or vacation expenses, which is prohibited by the law “On Combating Corruption.” Under Clause 7, Part 3, Article 12.1 of Federal Law No. 273-FZ of December 25, 2008, “On Combating Corruption,” persons holding state office in the Russian Federation may not, in connection with the performance of their official duties, receive remuneration not provided for by Russian law (loans, monetary or other remuneration, services, payment for entertainment, vacations, transportation expenses) or gifts from individuals or legal entities.
I am sure that any independent court, after reviewing our arguments, would have ruled in our favor. Deputy Rudensky would have been stripped of his mandate. And his clearly unlawful enrichment should be the subject of a criminal investigation.
Yes, for now everything is the other way around: I am the one under investigation and under house arrest, while Deputy Rudensky goes on building his 45-million-ruble house. But that does not change the truth in any way.
Thanks to everyone who read to the end. We’d be glad if you help enlighten your friends and acquaintances about this modest United Russia deputy.
Update:
Report from today’s hearing: http://www.mk.ru/politics/2014/06/30/deputat-rudenskiy-zasudil-navalnogo.html