Andsource The former director of MUE Metroelektrotrans was fined 100,000 rubles. “The money went not for enrichment, but for the needs of the team,” the lawyers of the ex-general director of Metroelectrotrans, Asfan Galyavov, prayed to Themis for a fair verdict. On Monday, the Vakhitovsky District Court examined his criminal case in one sitting in a special order. The investigation concluded that Galyavov did not put a penny in his pocket from the Demography national project, but gave millions to repair two trolleybus depots. For active repentance, confession of guilt, confession, he managed to avoid real punishment. Details are in the material “BUSINESS Online”.
Not for the intended purpose
At first, federal judge Dinar Khabibullin did not even immediately notice Asfan Galyavov in the hall. He hid behind the broad backs of his lawyers, leaning closely on the empty judicial “aquarium”. By the way, it is in it, in the same hall, that the ex-head of the TFB Robert Musin, who is being tried in the second case, is “visiting”. The judge had to separately hail the former general director of MUP “Metroelektrotrans” to make sure that he was present at the meeting. As soon as the court “met” the defendant, the process started on its merits.
The defendant's lawyer Airat Urazmanov petitioned for additional documents characterizing his client to be attached to the case file: medals, letters of appreciation. The announcement of all the certificates took almost 10 minutes, all with one goal – to remind once again that they are judging a highly respectable person who worked faithfully for the good of the republic. The court attached all the characterizing certificates to the case without further questions.
Announcing the indictment, the assistant prosecutor of the Vakhitovsky district, Artem Nikolaev, described Galyavov's sins in detail. As an edification, the state prosecutor recalled that Galyavov led the unitary enterprise and was responsible for its activities, that his duties included the conscientious management of the MUP, which included, among other things, the targeted use of all funds. But somehow it didn't work out.
He encroached on the money of the national project? Why Asfana Galyavov was tied up
In January 2019, the investigation established that Galyavov decided to apply from Metroelektrotrans to the Vakhitovsky District Employment Center for participation in the Older Generation federal project. It is included in the national project “Demography” and involves the provision of subsidies for vocational training and additional education for employees of the enterprise of pre-retirement age. The amount of the subsidy was 12.3 million rubles. At the same time, the investigators are sure that Galyavov initially did not intend to train anyone with this money, but planned to dispose of the funds at his own discretion.
On his orders, the deputy director of the MUP for personnel, a certain Gimadutdinova (her name is not given in court) prepared an application for the retraining of 180 employees of pre-retirement age. The calculation was as follows: 68.5 thousand rubles per employee, or a total of 12.3 million rubles. What was the plan to spend the money on? Part of the funds was supposed to go to the teachers' salary fund, part – to the production of curricula, rent of training areas, overalls for practical work, production of certificates, etc. Galyavov signed the application, it was quickly approved, and by April 30 the subsidy “dripped” to the account of Metroelectrotrans. After that, Galyavov gave the order to prepare a package of documents to “create the appearance of targeted disbursement of funds,” prosecutor Nikolaev said.
This package of reporting documents included contracts with 10 active employees of the MUP, who were allegedly hired as teachers. Of course, they didn’t know anything about it and didn’t teach anything, and the accountants cashed out the money that was supposed to go to pay for their services in several tranches from the accounts of the MUP and handed everything over to Galyavov in cash, the prosecutor said. In total, a little more than 4 million rubles were cashed in this way. But the Investigative Committee came to the conclusion that Galyavov did not put a penny in his pocket, but spent everything on the repair of trolleybus depots No. other expenses of MUP. This is the first criminal episode in the Galyavov case.
A similar story happened in 2020. Only then the subsidy for the “Older Generation” project was already 7 million rubles, for which it was supposed to train 100 employees. Some of them were also cashed out in several tranches – to be precise, 3.273 million rubles – and also spent on repair work at the depot.
Both episodes were qualified by the investigation and the state prosecution under Part 1 of Art. 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (“Abuse of official powers”). Although initially the case against the former general director of Metroelectrotrans was initiated under Art. 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (“Fraud”). This is a more “severe” article, suggesting a maximum penalty of up to 10 years in prison. 285th, according to the first part, is punished with a maximum of 4 years in prison, and then in rare cases. The reclassification of Galyavov's case became known in mid-November, when he was given a copy of the indictment for review. The reason for changing the article was that the investigators did not find evidence of Galyavov's misappropriation of funds from federal subsidies. “Condescension” was also added at the stage of investigation by the repentance of the former director of Metroelectrotrans.
“Fair punishment” in response to a full confession of guilt
Galyavov himself asked for the consideration of the case in a special manner. This means that no judicial investigation, no interrogation of witnesses, no examination of materials is carried out, and the court makes a decision, in fact, on the basis of the accusation and the confession of guilt by the defendant. The court granted Galyavov's request for an expedited consideration of the case and immediately proceeded to judicial debate.
“Taking into account the identity of the defendant, the severity of the deed, I ask you to recognize Galyavov guilty,” the state prosecutor said and asked the court to impose a fine of 50 thousand rubles on the former general director of Metroelectrotrans (30 thousand rubles for each episode, and in aggregate by adding – 50 thousand). Galyavov himself refused to answer anything in the debate, trusting his lawyers.
Defender Ruslan Imanov reminded the court that thanks to “the brilliant organization of Galyavov, the transport infrastructure of Kazan has become more developed and convenient for both residents and guests of the city.” According to Imanov and the second lawyer Urazmanov, Galyavov is characterized as a good person, there is a lot of evidence of this in the case. He did not appropriate the funds, but also sent them to the work of the enterprise, “in fact, the money remained in the budgetary system of the republic.” “Do not forget about all the good deeds, the merits of Asfan Galyamovich after one mistake. I ask you to take into account all exceptional mitigating circumstances: surrender, state of health, numerous positive characteristics,” said Imanov. He asked the court for a fair decision for Galyavov, as well as to remove the arrest from the property of his client.
“I think that the most important thing in this case is that the money was not spent on enriching my client, but was spent solely on the development of the municipal enterprise headed by him, that is, on the needs of the team, the population of Kazan. This should also be taken into account,” Urazmanov said. Galyavov himself was very brief in his last words: “Dear court, I ask you to give me a fair punishment, I admit my guilt. That's all.”
Judge Khabibullin did not shelve the decision, putting an end to the Galyavov case, taking a break only for lunch. The court agreed with the arguments of the prosecution, finding the former general director of Metroelektrotrans guilty and sentencing him to a fine of 100,000 rubles (60,000 rubles for each episode, and cumulatively by adding up – 100,000). By the way, this is 2 times more than the state prosecutor requested, which is very rare – usually judges, on the contrary, tend to slightly milder punishments compared to those requested by prosecutors.