The Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) informed the ex-chairman of the board of Naftogaz Andrey Kobolev and his defenders about the completion of the investigation.
.in_text_content_22 { width: 300px; height: 600px; } @media(min-width: 600px) { .in_text_content_22 { width: 580px; height: 400px; } }
On April 14, the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) left without consideration a petition to extend the investigation in the Kobolev case, since the law does not provide for a second petition if the first was denied.
At the same time, the investigating judge Larisa Zadorozhnaya noted that the decision can be appealed to the Appeals Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, although this is also not provided for by law.
The judge also denied Andrei Kobolev’s lawyers’ request to return the petition to the detectives.
Kobolev told Public that he considers this decision “fair” and the case should be taken to court.
The decision of the investigating judge can still be appealed to the VAKS Appeals Chamber. Prosecutors have only a few days left to either close the case or complete the investigation, open the investigation materials to the defense, and after reading them, send the indictment to the court.
The Anti-Corruption Action Center notes that the international legal instructions on the interrogation of individual members of the Supervisory Board have not yet been completed in the case and the examination has not been completed.
In the morning, NABU reported that the new petition was allegedly due to the fact that detectives seized 37 GB of electronic correspondence of persons involved in the bonus process at Naftogaz, and this correspondence is being examined, translated and analyzed. According to the investigation, these are the new circumstances that arose after the filing of the preliminary petition.
The defense argued that six of the eight points of the new petition repeated the previous one, although two points were different, one of them spoke about the second episode of the payment of bonuses, which is not in suspicion, and the circumstances of the seized correspondence were known earlier and about no one reported them during the consideration of the preliminary petition.
The correspondence contains information that, according to NABU, may be of significant importance in criminal proceedings, but a full-fledged analysis requires considerable time.
Source: Racurs
I am David Wyatt, a professional writer and journalist for Buna Times. I specialize in the world section of news coverage, where I bring to light stories and issues that affect us globally. As a graduate of Journalism, I have always had the passion to spread knowledge through writing.