20 September 2018
Moscow: 14:17
London: 12:17

Consular queries:  
+44 (0) 203 668 7474  
info@rusemb.org.uk  

 

PRESS RELEASES AND NEWS

16.03.2017

Why Are Fugitives From Justice Welcome in the UK?

Our western partners and the media regularly raise such issues as human rights, crime and corruption in Russia. As we stated previously, we view such dubious tactics as being agenda-driven. In fact, Russia is a committed party to the fundamental international conventions on human rights. Russia is a persistent anti-corruption campaigner and participates in the relevant anti-corruption initiatives.

Curiously enough, corrupt people find their way out of Russia and they are specifically setting their sights on London as they flee from justice. This raises many questions of human rights and corruption in Great Britain.

In fact, Great Britain de facto harbours quite a few Russian citizens who face charges in Russia for committing criminal offences such as fraud on a large scale, embezzlement, misappropriation of large amounts of money, robbery, murder.

Damages from these crimes incurred by the Russian state and private companies are running into tens and hundreds of millions, not to mention damage to the wellbeing of other Russian citizens, assault on their health and life.

Over the period of 2002-2016 Britain has refused to extradite 51 Russian citizens by direct and personal decisions of Home Secretary or as a result of chicanery tactics in London court. Dozens of cases are still pending.

Britain doesn’t provide any compelling reasons for such refusals. All we hear is that those hiding in here either have acquired immigrant status de jure, or that their extradition may result in human rights violations in Russia. It appears that those who are in Russia are corrupt individuals, but once on British soil, they are protected under farfetched pretexts, including assumed violation of their rights in future. This is absurd.

With most Russian extradition requests accompanied by detailed information on the criminal charges against such individuals, comprehensive legal and inculpatory basis, we repeatedly have to point out the obvious, i.e. the requests are not politically motivated and they have nothing to do with race, religion or ethnic background. Discrimination on these grounds is simply forbidden under Russian law. However, London prefers to keep ignoring real expert opinions, even by British experts, as well as written guarantees by the Russian side that all the rights of these Russian citizens will be respected, including those envisaged by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, the relevant conventions of the UN, the Council of Europe, and their protocols.

It never fails to amaze us that the Russian citizens who fled to the UK as fugitives, while here become British subjects. Once with a legal status, such individuals can also legalize funds acquired by criminal methods – quite a handy instrument for them for laundering money and obstructing justice. Just wonder why British authorities are willing to take them under patronage?

One cannot help coming to the conclusion that refusals of extradition by the British Government are politically motivated.

By all accounts, this practice discredits the country’s judiciary, which the British are proud of. We believe that police, investigative and prosecution authorities in any country, including the UK, should adhere to the same professional and moral principles of fighting crime and protecting people. Harboring Russian fugitives does not do the British Government credit in the eyes of the Russians public opinion and the international community.

More than that, actions of this kind send a signal to people committing economic and other criminal offences in the Russian Federation and around the world, that they can flee to Britain and be all right there as long as London and Moscow are at odds politically.

Beware of whom one may be dealing with in everyday life in Great Britain.
Here is a list of some extradition refusals.

 

List of Requests for Extradition of Russian Nationals
by the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation
Refused by the British Authorities


The total number of Russian nationals the British authorities have refused to extradite to the Russian Federation over the period from 2002 to 2016 is 51 persons. Among those wanted and accused of committing various criminal offences in Russia are the following.

 

1. GLUSHKOV Nikolay Alekseevich (last, first and middle name), charged with organizing a large-scale fraud scheme with accomplices. Mr Glushkov is accused of embezzling large amounts of funds, linked to property theft of OJSC «Aeroflot - Russian Airlines».
Extradition request for Mr Glushkov was sent to the Home Office in January 2015 in order to bring him to criminal liability under Article 159 - 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for committing a number of severe financial offences on the territory of Russia.
In February 2016 the Home Secretary declined to extradite the Russian national.


2. SHEMYAKIN Boris Yurievich, charged with assistance in large-scale embezzlement in collusion through abuse of power, linked to property theft of OJSC “Bank Moskvy” (Moscow Bank). Extradition request for Mr Shemyakin was sent to the Home Office in July 2015 in order to bring him to criminal liability under Article 160 – 4, Article 33 - 5 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
The Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


3. BORODIN Andrey Fridrihovich, charged with assistance in large-scale embezzlement scheme through abuse of power, with the help of accomplices, linked to the property theft of OJSC “Bank Moskvy” (Moscow Bank).
Extradition request for Mr Borodin was sent to the Home Office in October 2014 in order to bring him to criminal liability under with Article 160 – 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In March 2015 the Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


4. AKULININ Dmitry Victorovich, charged with assistance in large-scale embezzlement scheme through abuse of power, with the help of accomplices, linked to the property theft of OJSC “Bank Moskvy” (Moscow Bank).
Extradition request for Mr Akulinin was sent to the Home Office in October 2014 in order to bring him to criminal liability under Article 160 – 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In March 2015 the Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


5. NIKITIN Yuri Vladimirovich, charged with organizing and heading a criminal group, 4 counts of abuse of power with serious consequences, 4 counts of embezzlement through abuse of power by an organized group in large amounts, 2 counts of money laundering of funds acquired through committing crime by an organized group in large amounts (Articles 210 -1, Artcle 210 - 2, Article 160 – 4, 174.1 – 3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation respectively).
Extradition request for Mr Nikitin was sent to the Home Office in August 2013 in order to bring him to criminal liability in compliance with the Russian legislation.
In August 2015 the Home Office officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


6. SKARGA Dmitry Yuryevich, charged with being part of a criminal group, abuse of power leading to serious consequences, embezzlement through abuse of power by an organized group, money laundering of funds acquired through committing crime by an organized group in large amounts (Articles 210 – 3, 201 – 2, 160 – 4, 174.1 – 3 of the under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation respectively).
Extradition request for Mr Skarga sent to the Home Office in August 2013.
In August 2015 the Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


7. IZMAYLOV Tagir Kadirovich, charged with being part of a criminal group, abuse of power resulting in serious consequences, embezzlement through abuse of power by an organized group in large amounts (Articles 210 – 3, 201 – 2, 160 – 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation respectively).
Extradition request for Mr Izmaylov sent to the Home Office in August 2013.
In August 2015 the Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


8. ZHELYABOVSKIY Yuri Anatolyevich, charged with fraud.
Request was sent to the Home Office in May 2015 in order to bring him to criminal liability under Article 159 - 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In June 2016 the Home Secretary Office officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


9. CHERVYAKOV Ruslan Anatolyevich, charged with abuse of power for the purpose of deriving advantages and privileges for oneself, conflicting with the legal interests of the organization he was working for, which resulted in damage to its interests.
Extradition request for Mr Chervyakov was sent to the Home Office in November 2013 in order to bring him to criminal liability under Article 201 – 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In October 2015 the Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


10. MUROMTSEVA Tatiana Anatolievna, has been charged with having committed several serious crimes on the territory of Russia, including fraud. Request was sent to the Home Office in May 2015 in order to bring her to criminal liability under Article 159 – 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In June 2016 the Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


11. GAVRIKOV Dmitry Gennadyevich, charged with large-scale fraud in collusion through abuse of power by an organized group under Article 159 – 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Extradition request for Mr Gavrikov was sent to the Home Office in December 2013.
In October 2015 the Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


12. KAPCHUK Sergey Aleksandrovich, charged with large-scale fraud in collusion through abuse of power under Article 159 – 3of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Extradition request for Mr Kapchuk was sent to the Home Office in August 2010.
In June 2014 the Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


13. ALEXANDROVICH Alexander Eduardovich, charged with organizing large-scale embezzlement through abuse of power, as well as money laundering.
Extradition request for Mr Alexandrovich was sent to the Home Office in August 2006 in order to bring him to criminal liability under Article 33 – 3, Article 159 – 4 (fraud by an organized group in large amount), Article 174.1 – 4 (organized money laundering, acquisition of property through criminal actions by an organized group) and Article 201 – 2 (abuse of power) of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In February 2007 the Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


14. BEYLIN Yury Arkadyevich, accused of illegal entrepreneurship, committed by an organized group, accompanied by the deriving large amount of revenue.
Extradition request for Mr Beylin was sent to the Home Office in February 2009 in order to bring him to criminal liability under point a) and b) of Article 171 – 2 (illegal entrepreneurship of an organized group) of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In March 2009 the Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


15. DIDYCHUK Lada Grigoryevna, charged with 8 acts fraud and large-scale embezzlement (Article 159 - 3 and 159 - 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation respectively).
Extradition request for Ms Didychuk was sent to the Home Office in December 2010 in order to bring her to criminal liability in compliance with the Russian legislation.
In August 2012 the Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


16. LOMAKO Oxana Veniaminovna, charged with large-scale fraud and embezzlement in an organized group.
Extradition request was sent to the Home Office in April 2011 in order to bring her to criminal liability under Article 159 – 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In April 2012 the Home Secretary officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


17. STROGANOV Dmitry Alexandrovich, charged with assistance in large-scale embezzlement through abuse of power with the help of accomplices. A criminal case was opened in connection with theft of property of OJSC “Bank Moskvy” (Moscow Bank)
Extradition request for Mr Stroganov was sent to the Home Office in February 2015 in order to bring him to criminal liability under Article 33 – 5 and Article 160 – 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In March 2016, Westminster Magistrate’s Court officially declined to extradite the Russian national.


18. DUBOV Yuli Anatolyevich, accused of large-scale fraud by organized group under Article 147 – 3 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR. Extradition request for Mr Dubov was sent to the Home Office in November 2002. In October 2003 Bow Street Magistrates’ Court refused to extradite the Russian national.

 

19. ERESHCHENKO Anatoly Vladimirovich, charged with large-scale fraud in an organized group and property damage through deception and abuse of trust, committed by an organized group in large amounts. A request was sent to the Home Office in November 2013 in order to bring him to criminal liability under Article 159 – 4 (fraud and embezzlement) and point a) and b) of Article 165 - 2 (property damage through deception by an organized group) of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (charged with five crimes total).
In May 2015, A.V.Ereshchenko was arrested in compliance with the warrant issued by a District Judge at Westminster Magistrates’ Court. During the court hearing on the same day, he was released on bail until June 2015.
In December 2015, a District Judge at Westminster Magistrate’s Court discharged the Russian national from extradition proceedings.


20. MUZIKYAVICHUS Kyastutis, charged with attempt of illegal trade of large quantities of narcotics and psychotropic drugs in collusion, as well as drug smuggling and illegal acquisition, storage and transit of narcotic substances for the purpose of sale.
Extradition request for Mr Muzikyavichus was sent to the Home Office in June 2010 in order to bring him to criminal liability under
Article 30 – 3 and Article 228 – 4 (attempt of illegal trade of narcotics and psychotropic substances), Article 188 – 2 (drug smuggling) and Article 228 - 4 (illegal acquisition, storage and transit of narcotic substances for the purpose of sale) of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In December 2010, the Westminster Magistrates’ Court granted the request to extradite Mr Muzikyavichus. In February 2011, the Home Secretary has issued a certificate on this case. In May 2011, HM High Court of Justice in England has accepted the appeal and returned the case for reconsideration. In October 2011, the Westminster Magistrates’ Court officially declined to extradite Mr Muzikyavichus.


21. GORNOVSKY Nikolay Nikolayevich, charged with abuse of power. A request was sent to the Home Office in June 2007 in order to bring him to criminal liability under Article 201 – 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In February 2009, the proceedings were dropped by the court, the extradition request was returned. In August 2011 after another request the Magistrates’ Court refused to issue an arrest warrant.


22. TREFILOV Georgiy Yuryevich, charged with 16 counts of large-scale fraud by an organized group under Article 159 – 4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. An Extradition request was sent in September 2011.
The Westminster Magistrates’ Court refused the request in November 2012.




LATEST EVENTS

18.09.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning the classification of the materials on A.Perepilichny by the UK government

Question: How would you comment on yet another decision of the British side to classify additional information on Mr A.Perepilichny within the inquest into his death? Answer: This procedural decision concerns classification of information on Mr A.Perepilichny’s connections to the British secret services, to wit, whether he has been their agent or made contact with them. It has been made public just before the next hearing of the inquest into the death of Mr A.Perepilichnny, which is scheduled for 21 September in the Old Bailey.


17.09.2018 - Embassy press officer’s reply to a media question concerning the statements of FCO Minister of State Sir Alan Duncan

Question: How would you comment on the statement of Minister of State Sir Alan Duncan to the effect that the UK will “push for new sanctions […] as well as robustly enforcing the existing EU regime against Russia”? Answer: This and other similar statements fall in line with the Conservative government’s current policy aimed at destroying the fabric of Russian-British relations, further isolating Russia and presenting it as a major threat to the “rules-based international system”. Faced with the realities of Brexit, the British government is desperate to convince its partners of the need for a tougher sanctions regime against Russia. As usual, it resorts to insinuations, unverified facts and media leaks. Despite our numerous requests, no evidence of Russia’s responsibility has been provided. Russia’s proposals of cooperation in dealing with common challenges and threats, including in the sphere of cybersecurity and chemical disarmament, are being rejected without explanation.


13.09.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning upcoming annual conferences of the UK’s major political parties

Question: What does the Embassy expect from the party conference season in the United Kingdom starting this week? Answer: Annual conferences of UK’s major political parties are important events in the country’s life. At the conferences parties set out their priorities on a wide range of issues and arrange open and frank discussions on pressing domestic and international matters. Among other things, they offer a platform for a dialogue between party leaders and activists and the diplomatic corps.


12.09.2018 - Embassy press officer’s reply to a media question concerning the inquiry into the death of Mr Nikolay Glushkov

Question: 12 September marks 6 months since the mysterious murder of the Russian national Nikolay Glushkov in London. Does the Embassy have any new information regarding the circumstances of his death? Answer: Unfortunately, the British side continues to pay no attention to our numerous requests, including the official request of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation for legal assistance in the criminal case opened in Russia into the death of Mr Nikolay Glushkov, which was delivered to the Home Office as early as in April. The Embassy’s proposals to arrange a meeting between the Russian Ambassador and the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, or between experts from law enforcement authorities of the two countries, made as far back as in April, have also been met with silence.


11.09.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning the statements by the British officials on retaliatory measures against Russia

Question: How would you comment on the recent statements of the British officials who said that the UK was prepared to “retaliate” against Russia, including by deploying its cyber warfare capabilities? Answer: Yet again, we have seen a series of official statements to the effect that the UK should use its “massive retaliatory capabilities” to counter Russia’s “aggression”. Home Secretary Sajid Javid said on Sunday that the UK had “considerable powers, and we’ll bring all these powers, both covert and overt to bear on Russia”. Last week GCHQ head Jeremy Fleming spoke in a similar vein saying that the British authorities and their allies were prepared to “counter the threat” allegedly posed by Russia. In this context he mentioned a plan to “deploy the full range of tools”, including Britain’s “offensive cyber capability” against Russia. Such statements are reckless, provocative and unfounded.


09.09.2018 - Embassy response to Home Secretary Sajid Javid’s remarks at the Andrew Marr Show, 9 September 2018

Sajid Javid: This [the Salisbury incident] was the act, we now know unequivocally, crystal clear, this was the act of the Russian state. Comment: If Mr Javid has evidence that allows him to make this kind of direct accusations, why wouldn’t he share it with the public? So far, what the public has seen is nothing but photos of two Eastern-European-looking men walking around Salisbury on two different days. Everything else, including exact dates and names, let alone these gentlemen’s involvement in the Skripals poisoning and their links to the Russian state, is only assertions based on unverifiable “intelligence” and on the “lack of alternative explanations”. If the “crystal clear”-level evidence exists, it is in everyone’s interest for it to be published.


08.09.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s response to a media question on the investigation Nikolay Glushkov’s death

Question: How would you comment on the new circumstances of the investigation by British authorities of the death of Nikolay Glushkov? Answer: We should note that British authorities continue to refuse to cooperate on the investigation of the mysterious death on 12 March in London of former Deputy Director General of “Aeroflot” Mr Nikolay Glushkov producing different versions and leaks that are convenient for the UK Conservative government.


07.09.2018 - Reply by the Embassy Press Officer to a question regarding alternative explanations of the Salisbury incident

Question: How could you comment on the statements on Russia having produced “40 fictitious narratives” on the Salisbury attack? Answer: These reports are themselves fictitious. As we have said before, Russia does not, and cannot, have an official version of the incident for the simple reason of having no access to any data on which that version might be based. Russian discussions over this issue are going on in a UK-imposed information vacuum, filled with endless leaks in British media which turn out to be false time and again. One may recall how many times it was announced that suspects had been identified (each time with different names and in varying numbers), or how many ways of executing the attack have been discussed.


06.09.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning accusations against Russia of poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal

Q.: Has the Embassy received any materials from the UK supporting yesterday’s accusations against Russia related to the Skripal case? A.: No, we have not received any additional documents, clarifications or requests. The British authorities continue to expect “answers” from Russia, but they forget to ask questions. As we have pointed out earlier, London’s accusations are coupled with a blunt refusal to cooperate. Instead, we are spoken to in the language of ultimatums. The latest example was yesterday’s meeting at the Foreign Office where Ivan Volodin, Chargé d’Affaires a.i., was denied an opportunity to reply to the British démarche, raise additional questions or explain Russia’s position.


06.09.2018 - Russian Foreign Ministry Statement

British Prime Minister Theresa May’s remarks at the British Parliament on September 5 regarding the Skripal case and the poisoning of two British nationals in Amesbury were delivered in an absolutely unacceptable tone. They contain a number of presumptuous accusations against Russia and two allegedly Russian citizens. We strongly reject these insinuations.



all messages