The court confiscated shares of the Kaliningrad port and 370 million rubles from the family of a State Duma deputy. extracted income

Central District Court on Tuesday, July 11, satisfied the claim Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation to a State Duma deputy Andrey Kolesnikhis wife Marina Lysenko and mother-in-law Nadezhda Lysenko on the withdrawal in favor of the state of 51.75% of the shares JSC “Kaliningrad Commercial Sea Port” and 369.23 million rubles. “illegal derived income,” a RUGRAD correspondent reports from the courtroom. The decision of the court of first instance can be appealed.

The judge of the Central District Court, Elena Korenetskaya, needed only 2 preliminary and 2 main court hearings to make a decision. On June 21, the suit of the Prosecutor General’s Office was registered in the court filing cabinet, and on June 30, its consideration began. During the meeting, the representative of the Kaliningrad Sea Commercial Port JSC even noted that this speed was “surprising”.

The representative of the Prosecutor General’s Office, in turn, declared the validity of the claim by the state, and called the defendants “three actors of corruption.” “All 3 defendants played an active role in violating anti-corruption laws. Kolesnik is directly a corrupt official who grown together with state authorities and combines the violation of the law, anti-corruption legislation … Two qualities in himself: as a businessman and as a State Duma deputy. Members of his family actively help him, ”said a representative of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation during the debate.

Lawyers of Andrey Kolesnik and members of his family indicatedthat the plaintiff’s witnesses (ex-financial director of the port Oleg Ershov and ex-general director and co-founder Vladimir Kalinichenko) did not name the sources of their information about the situation in the port, and the lawsuit contains “only allegations that Kolesnik is a corrupt official, that his business has survived “.

“Kolesnik was never a corrupt official, he devoted his whole life to the work of the port,” the representative of the State Duma deputy said in court.

Also, the lawyers separately mentioned an audio recording made directly in the Prosecutor General’s Office (its contents were not disclosed in court, the representative of the Prosecutor General’s Office at the preliminary meeting declaredthat the deputy confirmed some of the positions of the plaintiff).

Andrei Kolesnik’s lawyer stated that it was a personal conversation and Kolesnik did not know that he was being recorded: “My principal came precisely for a conversation with a representative who is in the meeting … To make an audio recording, then conduct an examination, it was conducted behind the scenes … He was not warned … This entry cannot be evidence. It goes beyond what is reasonable and legal. This is vile in relation to a person, and a person came with good intentions, ”said Mikhail Uvarov, a lawyer for a State Duma deputy.

The representative of the wife and mother-in-law of the deputy, Vladislav Filatiev, speaking about the evidence of the prosecutor’s office and the methods of their collection, said that “it’s probably not 1937 now.” Commenting on the correspondence of the work in the port of the wife of the deputy Marina Lysenko to the level of her salaries, he also asked a rhetorical question, “what right does the prosecutor’s office have to intervene in a private matter.”

The representative of the prosecutor’s office in his speech pointed out that none of the witnesses could explain that “what role and function do the spouse and mother-in-law of Andrey Kolesnik play in the port and “for what they receive those fabulous fees that are the income of Andrey Ivanovich Kolesnik” .

On Monday, July 10, at the hearing questioned 4 witnesses (2 on each side). Among them, including the former director of the port, Vladimir Kalinichenko.

Lawyer Mikhail Uvarov, representing State Duma Deputy Andrei Kolesnik in court, declaredthat the prosecutor’s office influenced the court through obviously inadmissible evidence, and that the FSB actually provided operational support for this case.

Representatives of Andrey Kolesnik refused in a motion to postpone or postpone the consideration of the case, so that the deputy takes a personal part in the process and gives the necessary explanations. According to his defenders, Kolesnik was in Moscow during the court hearings and worked in the State Duma. Judge Korenetskaya noted that the defendant could exercise the right to give written explanations.

As RUGRAD reported Earlier, at a personal reception at the Prosecutor General’s Office, State Duma Deputy Andrey Kolesnik confirmed the fact that he had been in charge of the Kaliningrad Commercial Sea Port for the past 27 years. His explanations were attached to the case file.

Under the violations of anti-corruption legislation, the Prosecutor General’s Office interpreted “illegal acquisition, hidden ownership of shares of Kaliningrad Sea Commercial Port JSC, as well as illegal commercial activities in port management and illegal enrichment.”

“Having acquired 28.5% of the shares in 2001-2002, the defendant first issued them to legal entities, then – under a sale and purchase agreement – in his own name, which allowed him to become a director of the joint-stock company. At the same time, since March 2011 Kolesnik A.I. held government positions, including being a deputy of the Kaliningrad Regional Duma, the State Duma of the Russian Federation. Work in the highest legislative body of the state, according to the plaintiff, required Kolesnik A.I. refusal to carry out business activities. Contrary to the established prohibitions, he acquired assets and made a profit in the industry in which he made legislative decisions as a deputy – port and transport. Thus, the profitability of his business directly depended on the rule-making activities of the State Duma, in which he was personally involved. About the arising conflict of interest to the competent authorities Kolesnik A.I. did not report,” the Kaliningrad Regional Court said in a statement.

“This is not a salary, this is income received “because”

Andrey Kolesnik’s wife, as director of external relations of the port, “earned” 64 million rubles in 2022 alone.

The original of this material

© www.rugrad.online07/11/2023, Shareholders “just talked” in the port

The Central District Court began to consider the claim of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation against State Duma deputy Andrei Kolesnik, his wife and mother-in-law. The supervisory authority asks to recover shares of Kaliningrad Sea Commercial Port JSC, as well as 369 million rubles, to the state’s income. alleged illegal income. To the settlement agreement of the parties did not come. On Monday, July 10, 4 witnesses were interrogated at the court session (2 from each side). Among them, including the former director of the port, Vladimir Kalinichenko.

“There were no dividends in the port as such, and everyone understands everything”

Vladimir Kalinichenko is a witness from the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation, a former director of the Kaliningrad Commercial Sea Port. He worked at KMTP since the late 1980s, after some time he headed the enterprise as a director, and also became one of the shareholders. But around 2012, Kalinichenko stopped visiting the port area. Respondent’s representatives indicatedthat the former director had a corporate conflict: lawyers claimed that the actions of the ex-head allegedly caused damage to KMTP in the amount of about 300 million rubles. Kalinichenko did not deny the fact of the conflict, but assured that he “has no hostile attitude” towards State Duma deputy Andrei Kolesnik.

Kalinichenko owned the shares of the port, according to his own testimony, until about 2016-2017, then they were redeemed Sovfracht company.

In court, he stated that “at the beginning of the 2000s” JSC “KMTP” had 4 shareholders: he himself, Andrei Kolesnik, who died in 2021 Vladislav Dorofeev and current deputy of the regional parliament Yuri Shitikov.

Part of Kalinichenko’s story in court was devoted to how dividends were distributed among shareholders in the port: “The system was built in the port so that there were no dividends as such.

He also commented on the income of Andrei Kolesnik’s wife in the Kaliningrad Sea Commercial Port (the Prosecutor General’s Office has questions about them), saying that “this function could not cost so much.” As previously stated, Marina Lysenko worked in the port as a director for corporate and external relations. In court, in particular, a representative of the Prosecutor General’s Office said that Lysenko received “more than 64 million rubles” in 2022, despite the fact that since August last year she had a part-time job.

“The income that a person conditionally receives from external relations cannot be more than that of a certain head of a department. And when the situation looks like the head of the department gets 200 thousand, and when the PR director suddenly gets a million, it’s clear that this is not a salary, this is income received “because”, because everyone understands everything, ”said in court Vladimir Kalinichenko, adding that “the function costs a maximum of 50 thousand rubles, well – 100 thousand rubles.”

“Objectively, the picture is very simple: the income that Andrei Ivanovich receives is the income that he receives … Yes, conditional dividends. Yes, they are veiled… How does he get it: through his wife, through himself, through proxies – that’s already… You can take a statement and see,” Kalinichenko said in court

For the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation, the testimony of the former director of the KMTP is still important because it indirectly follows that it was Kolesnik who was in charge of the port in the status of a State Duma deputy (the witness preferred not to voice the specific sources of this information). In particular, he stated that, in his opinion, Andrei Kolesnik’s mother-in-law could not acquire the shares of the port “on her own initiative”. “Of course, Andrey Ivanovich was engaged in this,” the witness emphasized in court.

“Whoever receives the income is the one who manages. I have a lot of different information, I confirm that, of course, Andrey Ivanovich is involved.

Representatives of the defendant pointed out that the former director could not have objective information about the management system of JSC “KMTP”, since he had not been in the port since 2012. “I know Andrei Ivanovich quite well… I don’t even have any doubts… A huge number (including cargo owners) who came to consult me ​​commented that it was impossible to conclude a contract without Andrei Ivanovich meeting with the owner” , — tried to fend off Kalinichenko.

In general, the representatives of the defendants tried in court to point out the bias of the witness. In court, they provided a certain document from the current director Vladimir Lavrenchukwhere it was noted that Kalinichenko “caused damage in the amount of more than 300 million rubles by his activities.”

“Single executive body”

Volodymyr Lavrenchuk himself was interrogated in court as a witness. In part, it is his testimony that refutes some of the theses voiced by Vladimir Kalinichenko. In particular, he stated that, according to the charter, it is his position that is the “sole executive body” in the port. He also gave a negative answer to the question whether the State Duma deputy gave any orders to manage the port. Lavrenchuk answered in the negative to the question whether he witnessed “withdrawal or theft of funds by Andrei Kolesnik.”

Commenting on the work of Marina Lysenko, the director of the port confirmed (also stating that he was her immediate supervisor) that the employee “had a fairly high salary.” “Functions, roughly speaking, the outer perimeter. And marketing, and finding customers, and for reloading customers, suppliers of equipment that is imported in the port … ”, he said in court, adding that Lysenko’s functionality included“ search and first contact ”.

The work schedule, according to Lavrenchuk, Lysenko had was “usual”. “We didn’t fit strictly. She could also work on telephones…”, emphasized the director of JSC “KMTP”.

The witness admitted that in 2021 he decided to increase the salary of his subordinate. The head of the port enterprise proceeded, in his own words, from the “efficiency” of the employee’s work. He, in particular, agreed with the thesis that Lysenko managed to find clients who “increased the profits” of the port.

After this statement, the judge pointed out that at the meeting of the board of directors it was stated that the organization had no profit.

“This is at the end of the year, and I’m talking about a specific one …”, the director found. He stated that after Andrey Kolesnik was elected to the State Duma, his wife wanted to move to Moscow. By raising wages, the port actually wanted to keep the employee.

“Do you spend money on yourself? Don’t you give it to Kolesnik?”

Otherwise, for each thesis of the witnesses from the plaintiff’s side, there was a counterargument from the witnesses from the defendants’ side and vice versa (each of the parties petitioned to call two people as witnesses).

Oleg Yershov, former financial director of the commercial port, who was involved in the process by the Prosecutor General’s Office, said that since 2009 the port was “controlled” by Dorofeev and Kolesnik. Since this year, another major shareholder of JSC “KMTP” Vladimir Kalinichenko, according to the witness, has practically ceased to take part in the management of the enterprise.

“As far as I know, all the decisions that were made by the management of the port at that time, which were headed by Mr. Dorofeev and Kolesnik, were aimed at fully controlling the port and receiving all the income from its activities. For this, people who are controlled by Kolesnik and Dorofeev were elected to the board of directors, ”the former financial director of the port said in court.

Ershov also refused to name his sources of information (required by the representatives of the defendants), noting that he knew some facts “from the words of the workers”, but he was not sure about the safety of these people.

At the same time, as Yershov said, Kolesnik arranged for his wife in the port after he was elected to the State Duma for the first time in 2011 and a number of certain restrictions began to apply to him.

Another witness interrogated as part of the process is Alexander Kornyushin, Assistant Director for General Affairs of the Port Director. Witnesses from the plaintiff’s side described him as Andrei Kolesnik’s “confidant”. At the same time, Kornyushin did not deny that he was a member of the board of directors in the port (this confirmed company reports). Kornyushin himself could not answer the question of how many years he has been a member of the governing body of the joint-stock company. Prior to the commercial port, he worked for an organization that handled municipal parking lots. There, the future member of the board of directors of the port complex was engaged in personnel work.

“I had all the foremen, all the parking attendants…” he recalled in court. The representative of the prosecutor’s office tried to point out that Kornyushin simply did not have enough competence to be a member of the board of directors of such an enterprise as a trading port, but the representatives of the defendants objected that the law does not provide for an appropriate qualification at all. The witness refused to disclose his salary in the port. At the same time, according to the prosecutor’s office, Kornyushin’s income for 2022 amounted to 27.5 million rubles.

Since 2022, Kornyushin has been Kolesnik’s assistant as a State Duma deputy. But, answering the relevant question, Kornyushin said that the deputy did not use him as a nominal owner for any property.

For about a month, from August to September 2021, Kornyushin was also a shareholder of KMTP JSC. This was stated by the representative of the Prosecutor General’s Office.

“In 2021? I was a shareholder? the witness was confused. But the representative of the supervisory agency insisted, saying that Kornyushin owned more than 5 thousand shares of the port.

“Yes, there was such a period…,” the assistant director of the port unexpectedly recalled. – Natalya just called … Natalya Zhukova (this person was not previously mentioned in court materials. – Approx. ed.) … She, apparently, needed money, and offered this option, ”said the witness, confirming that he had bought the shares. He did not remember the purchase amount, noting that he then “gave away” the shares. The witness, in his own words, did not receive dividends during the period of holding the shares.

Are you spending money on yourself? Don’t you give them to the charioteer?” asked a representative of the Prosecutor General’s Office. Kornyushin made it clear that he spends money on himself.

The witness himself could not immediately remember in favor of whom the alienation of his share of shares took place. But in the case file there was a contract for the sale of securities. According to the document, the shares were sold to Andrei Kolesnik’s mother-in-law, Nadezhda Lysenko. The witness did not deny this information.

“Perhaps the conversation went like this. Maybe something happened by accident… I can’t say whether I saw her in the port or not, but outside the port, yes. I don’t remember the circumstances.