Thread: Алексей Анатольевич Навальный (Blogger Alexei Navalny)

Well Yves Rocher didn't think it was normal.
They thought it was so unacceptable that they sued.


Edit - according to Swedish media, Yves Rocher say they have no complaint against Navalny. That is looking incredibly bad on Russia, if it is true. Is the crime fabricated?! Or did they just dig up some crime that was so insignificant that not even the victim complained...

Originally Posted by Hanna

Well Yves Rocher didn't think it was normal.
They thought it was so unacceptable that they sued.


Edit - according to Swedish media, Yves Rocher say they have no complaint against Navalny. That is looking incredibly bad on Russia, if it is true. Is the crime fabricated?! Or did they just dig up some crime that was so insignificant that not even the victim complained...

First, when saying that Yves Rocher have no complaint against Navalny his lawyers show INTERNAL(!) letter from one of Yves Rocher managers to CEO that Navalny didn't do anything bad, besides the case is bad for reputation and so let's say that we have no complaints. CEO said that the case is valid. And to the question if he guilty or not... I knew people who got prison sentences for far less then that:

Сразу бросаются в глаза две вещи, которые Навальный старательно обходит стороной.
Во-первых, Олег Навальный действительно являлся топ-менеджером на «Почте России» и мог воспользоваться служебным положением для принуждения Ив Роше заключить договор с ООО "Главподписка". Подсудимые этот факт никак не опровергают.

Во-вторых, следствием установлено, что денежные средства, полученные от Ив Роше фирмой Навального, были спешно "легализованы". Двадцать миллионов были выведены на счета ООО "Кобяковская фабрика по лозоплетению", которое принадлежит родителям Навального. В частности, по договору аренды помещения 78 метров со ставкой аренды 300 000 рублей в месяц.

Чтобы понимать порядок цен, ставка аренды в бизнес-центре класса "А" в хорошем районе Москвы - в два с половиной раза (!) меньше, чем в подмосковном Кобяково.

Учитывая взаимозависимость арендатора и арендодателя, очевидно, что имела место мнимая сделка с целью вывода незаконно заработанных денег.

Originally Posted by Basil77

First, when saying that Yves Rocher have no complaint against Navalny his lawyers show INTERNAL(!) letter from one of Yves Rocher managers to CEO that Navalny didn't do anything bad, besides the case is bad for reputation and so let's say that we have no complaints. CEO said that the case is valid. And to the question if he guilty or not... I knew people who got prison sentences for far less then that:

But if the alleged victim doesn't have a complaint, then why prosecute?

Even if they decide they don't want the negative publicity - that's their call.

Le Monde writes about this here Comment le procès d'Alexeï Navalny est devenu « l'affaire Yves Rocher »
in a fairly unbiased way, I think.

Apparently the prosecution comes after Yves Rocher asked some Russian official about getting out of a disadvantageous contract, if I understood correctly. Russia is Yves Rocher's second largest market after France. The case was looked into and the alleged corruption was discovered. But Yves Rocher didn't sue Navalny or report them to anticorruption watchdogs, or anything.

It looks like Navalny probably did behave a bit dishonestly, but nobody even sued him for it or complained about it. So why prosecute?

Or am I missing something here?

This looks like abuse of the justice system to punish somebody who is politically inconvenient. I don't like it, and frankly I don't see why Putin with his 80% approval ratings would resort to something as shady as that.

I don't normally by into the criticisms of Russia in Western press, and it's obvious to me that most Russians don't even care about having Western democracy anyway. They'd rather have stability and economic growth. Fine!

But this time it looks like they are on to something. Who cares if Navalny overcharged a company that doesn't care about having been overcharged?

If the powers to be in Moscow wants to stop Navalnys activism they ought to be open about it, not whip up something like this. It undermines peoples faith in the justice system too, and it's petty. It gives Russia a bad reputation abroad.

If I understood the facts in this correctly then I disagree with the actions of the Russian state in this.

Some Russian in Luxembourg has started a petition against Yves Rocher about this. Part of the petition says:

On 4 December 2012, Bruno Leproux, general director of Yves Rocher Vostok, requested that the Investigative Committee of Russia look into the possible losses that Yves Rocher may have incurred in 2008-2012 as a result of its partnership with the firm Glavpodpiska. One of Glavpodpiska's shareholders was Alexey Navalny, who by 2012 had become the leader of the Russian opposition and was under constant pressure from the Russian authorities.

This request provided a formal pretext to start a criminal case against Alexey Navalny. Despite the legal prosecution, Navalny did not end his political activity and was then placed under house arrest. It has now been six months since he was barred from using the Internet, talking with anyone apart from close relatives, or making any comments to the press.
An internal investigation carried out by Yves Rocher Vostok showed that the accusations were groundless and that no financial damage was inflicted. Nevertheless, Yves Rocher is taking an extremely passive position in court: it has not demanded that justice be restored and it has not filed a request to drop the case due to lack of grounds. With its inaction, Yves Rocher is allowing a political process to develop which will let Vladimir Putin dispose of his main and most principled opponent - Alexey Navalny.

Seems very odd to say that "Putin's main opponent" is a blogger.

Originally Posted by Hanna

But if the alleged victim doesn't have a complaint, then why prosecute?

Even if they decide they don't want the negative publicity - that's their call.

They DO have a complaint. It's one of their managers who doesn't make a final decision who just offered their CEO to cancel the complaints. So the complaint is still valid. Second, everyone somehow forgot that besides two sides: Yves Rocher and Navalny's company there's a third side which also got losses: Почта России. It's a state company where Navalny's brother worked. It's him who make sure that Navalny's company got this very questionable contract and for that he got 3 years of real prison sentence because it's a clear case of corruption.

Вкратце, насколько я понял из материалов дела в открытых источниках, схема была следующая:
У Ив Роше возникают проблемы с доставкой заказов клиентам через Почту России (что неудивительно, всем известно как она у нас работает). Олег Навальный, который на тот момент является в Почте России большой шишкой, настоятельно рекомендует Ив Роше заключить договор с коммерческой фирмой-посредником, через которую проводить все сделки с почтой России, во избежание дальнейших проблем с доставкой. Совершенно случайно эта волшебная компания, которая так замечательно умеет решать все проблемы с доставкой через Почту России принадлежит его родному брату Алексею. Договор заключается и компания Алексея за короткое время получает от Ив Роше около миллиона долларов за свои посреднические услуги по "решению проблем". Чтобы не платить налоги с прибыли, а также на всякий случай (вдруг лохи-французы поймут, что их обвели вокруг пальца и попросят деньги вернуть), фирмой Навального заключается договор аренды маленького помещения у фабрики, принадлежащей его родителям, с месячной ставкой в 30(!) раз превышающей рыночную. Соответственно, деньги со счёта фирмы Навального выводятся на счёт его родителей как плата за аренду помещения. Схемка в общем-то простая, как валенок, и такое происходит сплошь и рядом. И сажают за такие дела и чиновников-воришек, как брат Навального Олег, и и бизнесменов-решальщиков, как сам Навальный, каждый год десятками, если не сотнями. Вот только по поводу других никто не поднимает такой дикой истерики. В СССР за такие дела бы к стенке поставили сразу, а тут: "условно", домашний арест и всё такое. Было бы о чём кричать.