As you may remember, after our investigation into the Italian villa-bribe, oligarch Mikhail Prokhorov sued Navalny. A few days ago, we received the lawsuit. And of course, we immediately showed it to Navalny himself, who is currently being held in a special detention center (and will remain there for another two weeks).
Alexei has read through the lawsuit, studied it, and asked us to pass along a letter to you.
Enjoy the read, and hello to everyone. We are, of course, also publishing the lawsuit itself.
I had been waiting for this document eagerly. I was consumed by curiosity and suffering over it.
After all, Mikhail Prokhorov is a serious man. If he said he was suing me, then surely he must have an argument so strong it would swat me like a fly. Our investigation would end up looking ridiculous.
Let me remind you that first we told you about the following remarkable story, and then documented it as well.
So, despite the fact that every house in that area had only gone down in price since 2008 (there was a financial crisis, after all), official Khloponin became €25 million richer (1.5 billion rubles) — the equivalent of 3,000 years of wages for the average Russian.
Some might call it a “miracle,” others a “unique case.” But my personal, well-founded value judgment is simple: Prokhorov is bribing Khloponin. He is paying him off for some shady dealings, schemes, and lobbying efforts. And I personally do not doubt for a second that, as a result of these little schemes, you and I have become poorer by a sum far greater than €25 million.
That is how bribes work: you give an official 1,000 rubles so he can steal a million.
And so our Mikhail Prokhorov loudly declared: this is a lie. The deal was honest. I am suing, and Navalny will pay me one ruble.
He said it so confidently that I even set aside that ruble and carried it with me at all times. It is not with me now, though — money is not allowed in the cell. But the ruble is in my personal belongings, together with my belt, mobile phone, and disposable razors.
I figured it would go like this: Mikhail Prokhorov would bring his lawsuit to court, explain why he bought the house for three times the market price, and everyone would see that Navalny was a slanderer. At that difficult moment, I would write a post saying: “Forgive me for everything, Michel. Come and collect your ruble.”
And now the lawsuit is in my hands. I scan it feverishly, looking for an explanation of why the house was so expensive.
A few possible explanations start forming in my head:
Read the lawsuit — we are publishing it in full — and judge the depth of my disappointment. None of that is in there. Mikhail Prokhorov explains absolutely nothing to us.
His only argument is, almost word for word: “If I had paid a bribe, a criminal case would have been opened against me. But no criminal case has been opened against me. Therefore, I did not pay a bribe, and Navalny has defamed me.”
Literally. “The thieves in the Kremlin and the government are considered honest people because there is no official ruling in which they formally declare themselves thieves.”
And, you will laugh, a judge has already been assigned — Marina Vasina, the very same one who set records for “objective justice” in the case of “Alisher Usmanov v. Alexei Navalny.”
Well, what can I say?
Dear Mikhail,
I no longer have even the slightest desire to give you my ruble. This lawsuit is yet another one-hundred-percent proof that I am right. Now everyone can see: our conclusions are correct, our documents do not lie. There is only one explanation for why the house was bought for three times its real value. The very one given in the “Video.”