Another court hearing in the Yves Rocher case is taking place right now. We are questioning yet another "prosecution witness"—Natalya Berezovskaya, who works for MPK, one of the alleged injured parties in the case. She was the one who signed the contract in question and oversaw it for five years—the same contract that investigators claim "caused damage."
You will be able to read a detailed account of her testimony in reports from the hearing, but in brief:
I signed the contract on my own initiative, turning to Oleg Navalny as a logistics specialist.
No one forced us; we really needed it ourselves, because the situation was critical.
We worked together perfectly well for five years, and there were no complaints.
There was no violation of the law, and everyone was satisfied with the prices.
I do not believe we suffered any damage, and I do not understand why this criminal case was opened.
Let me remind you that at the previous hearing we questioned the director of this company, who told the court that "we learned about the alleged damage to our company from the investigator, and all the damage calculations were done by the investigation."
The judge disallowed the question to witness Berezovskaya: "Why do you think we are even here right now?"
The answer is, of course, already more or less obvious. It was best put on Twitter:
People