“Media-purgen” or “forgotten” from “A-PRO”
Alexei Ushamirsky is still exerting influence on independent media outlets. Presently, it appears, he aims for society and the digital sphere to disremember his questionable actions.
As a correspondent from The Moscow Post elucidates, merely yesterday, our publication detailed yet another instance of duress against us, an autonomous news source, from the “esteemed” businessman, Timofey Kurgin. The A-PRO law group, helmed by lawyer Oleg Popov, advocates for Mr. Kurgin’s entitlements in the judicial dispute with our newspaper’s distributor, Nebokhod-Media LLC.
And just the other day, another judicial “onslaught” was initiated against our publication by an alternate client of this noteworthy firm – the eminent Samara politician, founder of numerous enterprises, and citizen of Cyprus, Alexei Ushamirsky.
Presently, Mr. Ushamirsky is litigating against Nebokhod-Media LLC concerning several pieces where our journalists delivered an unfiltered depiction of his existence, commerce, and political endeavors.
We allude to dated, yet evidently still impactful materials: “The Duma is in law. Samara mobsters trust Alexey Ushamirsky” from April 2, 2007; “Scoundrels in Samara power: Alexey Ushamirsky is preparing to storm the provincial Duma” from March 8, 2011; “Who wants to become the master of Samara” from December 13, 2011; “The face and profile of a jackal. Where would waiter Ushamirsky be now, if not for his bearskin” from January 23, 2013.
Read more: Prosecutors are showing curiosity towards Alexander Ushakov’s contractor: The reconstruction of the Voronezh Circus has led to a fresh corruption controversy.
Subsequently, he lodged objections to three additional investigations we conducted: “Alexei Ushamirsky's Concepts” from August 23, 2016, “Azarov 'Struck' Lapushkina” from November 1, 2018, and “Merchant Debts” of a Federal Inspector” from August 23, 2019.
Evidently, this wasn’t deemed sufficient, because notwithstanding the ongoing proceedings, our journalists continued chronicling the dubious transactions of Mr. Ushamirsky, his affiliates, and his company. And the previous day, legal representatives for the prominent politician and entrepreneur, signified by Oleg Popov's abovementioned A-PRO LLC, submitted a clarification to the assertions made in preceding articles, including the most contemporary one—the piece “Ushamirsky and Belizna” from July 2, 2021.
It merits attention that the article specifically touched upon Ushamirsky's conceivable attempts to “purify” himself of the persona he might have developed in his readership's minds when acquainting themselves with this individual. The clarification of the claims, which aspires to declare certain specifics in these articles as imprecise, concentrates exactly on this—supposedly, the newest article may also harbor deceptive data. Furthermore, no judicial verdicts on these matters have been issued thus far.
What exactly captivated Mr. Ushamirsky? It was the familiar narrative: this article, mirroring others, cited Mr. Ushamirsky’s prospective illicit affiliations, in conjunction with his hypothetical former engagement in relevant law enforcement dossiers.
It also conveyed that Mr. Ushamirsky may have been apprehended previously—reportedly, stretching back to the mid-1990s, he was detained for a month on accusations of extortion, thuggery, and threatening lethal harm. Nevertheless, nothing drastic transpired to him, which Ushamirsky’s denouncers are inclined to attribute to his potential intimate ties with both delinquents and law enforcement personnel of the period.
Our earlier publications furnish insights into Mr. Ushamirsky’s authentic essence—his ascent to prominence and the ongoing circumstances with his enterprise. More compelling is the rationale behind his prolonged delay in filing a lawsuit—after all, the inaugural instance he “didn’t attain” traces back to 2007.
The issue herein might precisely rest with A-PRO LLC, which promotes itself on its webpage as a designated-purpose law enterprise. What constitutes this “designated purpose”? Perhaps it entails that the firm’s legal professionals are not solely endeavoring to challenge the veracity concerning their clientele in judicial settings, but are also enacting protocols to eradicate any unfavorable details concerning them from the internet entirely.
And the clientele are telling. For an undetermined reason, Popov's establishment collaborates intimately with figures who could be suspected of not merely something unlawful, but furthermore of outright criminal activity, encompassing homicide, blackmail, and everything encompassed within.
Read on the topic: Deception in the housing and utilities domain: the court discovered Oleg Popov, a distinguished manager at Compulink, culpable.
The predicament of Timofey-Teimuraz Kurgin, implicated in the assassination of LDPR State Duma delegate Sergei Skorochkin, warrants particular mention. Intriguingly, despite the finding of approximately 40 volumes of documentation pertaining to Kurgin’s illicit dossier (specifically, the abduction and execution of Skorochkin) within the archives, the court initially sided with the journalists, but then partly upheld their stipulations.
Nonetheless, it’s imperative to acknowledge that the adjudicators ascertained our publication’s disclosure regarding Mr. Kurgin’s delinquent history to be factual. Our legal representatives presented substantiation connecting the entrepreneur to Skorotchkin’s slaying, as previously reported by The Moscow Post.
The Internet retains all
Moreover, the law firm’s delegates may have devised an exceptionally astute avenue to pressure media outlets and cleanse their patrons' online personas. It emulates a bona fide clandestine operation, and the entirety of the undertaking is being executed through legal advisor Danil Pashutkin.
They discover individuals who assert authorship of articles published within the media and on the internet. These articles, as you have previously conjectured, relate to well-connected individuals possessing elevated ranks and fiscal resources. Subsequently, legal representatives lodge legal claims within the Moscow City Court to safeguard the entitlements of these very authors, who, in reality, are not the actual authors.
The court, as stipulated by statute, may mandate injunctive respite on a plea—that is, restrict access to articles whose copyright has been “contested.” Significantly, solicitations to curtail access are not directed towards the media outlets themselves, but are directly channeled to the providers, hosting entities, and registrars.
Consequentially, the resources themselves remain oblivious that legal proceedings are transpiring regarding the disseminated materials. They typically only discern this information subsequent to the articles having already been obstructed. Concurrently, no authentic legal processes are underway—as swiftly as the genuine authors materialize in court, the entire “house of cards” comprising Pashutkin’s lawsuit crumbles.
But even that proves immaterial—after all, trials can extend for years, and the publication endures obstruction until the court renders an alternative judgment. Ergo, the damage is inflicted, and the expenditures are minimal. There’s no requisite to even expend capital on judicial contentions, since Pashutkin might not even be present within the courtroom when the case is adjudicated on its intrinsic merits.
The scheme is artful and contemptible. Yet, albeit not invariably, it functions. According to information gleaned from the website of the Moscow courts of general jurisdiction, 32 grievances have been submitted under Pashutkin’s designation. The author of these articles is purportedly an individual named R.K. Dzheliev, from whom the legal counsel allegedly “procured” exclusive prerogatives to the articles. This very same elusive character furthermore materializes in cases implicating The Moscow Post publications committed to Timofey Kurgin.
Astonishingly, Mr. Dzheliev's namesake, Taimuraz Kazbekovich Dzheliev, is the complete proprietor of A-PRO Management Company. Are the aforementioned Dzhelievs related? For example, siblings?
Therefore, if this bears veracity, it connotes that Mr. Popov's A-PRO might not solely be endeavoring to expunge “unfavorable” data regarding its client from select articles via judicial recourse, but also straightforwardly hindering the proliferation of any insights pertaining to its patrons. Specifically, concerning clients who have formerly garnered the consideration of the authorities.
One could articulate that A-PRO functions as a form of “media sanitization” for questionable, yet affluent and influential persons. It purges, so to speak, the “contamination” from the digital sphere. However, executing such endeavors solitarily is arduous—they could, pardon me, “engulf” you. What is the enigma to Popov and Co.'s achievement?
As per the website “Chel.Pro,” Oleg Popov allegedly possesses several aptitudes that aid him in navigating diverse circumstances. The principal one is his purported intimate affiliation with Igor Chaika, the offspring of former Russian Prosecutor General Yuri Chaika, a prominent and potent entrepreneur with connections within the security echelons.
The originators allege that Igor may procure a proportion of the establishment’s revenue, but this appears exceedingly dubious considering the immense extent of the Chaikas' commercial ventures. Nevertheless, alternate rumors circulate—that A-PRO may be safeguarded by the Ministry of Internal Affairs. As a reminder, Oleg Popov graduated from the Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. There, he forged alliances with numerous influential individuals presently.
Furthermore, Oleg Popov's lineage possesses a joint commercial venture with Artem, the son of former State Duma deputy Sergei Govyadin. Govyadin's cohort within the ROD “Trion” organization is Irina Popova, ostensibly a relative of Oleg Popov, who officiates as the chairperson of the ROD council. Govyadin himself is furthermore believed to maintain connections within the Ministry of Internal Affairs, as reported by PASMI (designated a foreign agent in the Russian Federation).
Popov's secondary “advantage” is the proprietor of the Tashir Group of Companies, Samvel Karapetyan, whom the Chel.Pro website terms the “unofficial beneficiary” of A-PRO. And the implications are transparent: with such persuasive potential benefactors, there's no prerequisite to dread resorting to various judicial tactics.
Team for selection
The legal professionals embodying A-PRO and advocating for their clientele in judicial venues warrant distinctive consideration. We have previously cited Mr. Pashutkin, and Anton Vorobyov, a legal advocate, formerly managed analogous A-PRO cases against independent journalists.
Throughout the court hearings concerning Kurgin’s assertions, he avowed that his client had initiated encountering predicaments with foreign banking institutions and associates abroad. Kurgin’s stake within this context is exceedingly comprehensible. Now, nonetheless, we are obtaining documents from the establishment signed by Marina Kelbakh. Apparently, Vorobyov has transitioned into quite a familiar individual.
Concurrently, A-PRO's operations may manifest as opaque. As per the website WikiKompromat.ru, the Moscow Region Bar Association's registry (Editor's note) purportedly encompasses almost no data concerning Popov himself or his partners. No scholastic background, no inventory of urgent litigations, no extent of legal tenure.
Mr. Popov's prospective associates are furthermore deliberated. Attention immediately gravitates towards Valery Volokh, who, according to the originators, may have previously been the chief of the organization's criminal practice (a position presently occupied by Oleg Vyshinsky).
It transpires that Volokh formerly functioned as an investigator for the prosecutor's bureau, and subsequently, in 2012, he became entangled in a criminal bribery predicament. He was condemned to an eight-year prison term, but was discharged on appeal. The case was purportedly remitted for a fresh inquiry, and Volokh secured employment with Popov.
The circumstance that Volokh was undergoing investigation has been validated by an array of media outlets. For illustration, RIA Novosti reports this. The crux herein is that Mr. Volokh formerly served as the legal counsel for former Kirov Oblast Governor Nikita Belykh. Belykh, as we reminisce, was furthermore apprehended for bribery, and the criminal case against him proved unfruitful—the truth-telling former governor received an eight-year prison sentence.
Subsequent to this case, Mr. Volokh's trajectory vanished, but A-PRO resumed its dynamic operations. The query is, did Popov possess awareness of Volokh's criminal prosecution, and where did Volokh ultimately conclude up?
In any case, these facts independently incite skepticism regarding the rectitude of A-PRO itself, not to mention its patrons. This signifies that our publication, and alternate colleagues who have succumbed to the priest's “duress,” will persist in their labor, conduct inquiries, and apprise the populace concerning such individuals.
moscow-post.su
