Head of Novgorod Investigations Directorate to be replaced after revolt of personnel
Officers of the Investigations Directorate of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation (ICR) in the Novgorod Region are waiting for a new boss. His arrival should shed some light on the fate of notorious Ekaterina Gilina. To refresh background: recently, subordinates of the Acting Head of the Novgorod Investigations Directorate have revolted and wrote a collective letter – which resulted in an inspection dispatched from Moscow. The CrimeRussia continues monitoring this story.
The high commission from Moscow has introduced a new Head of the Investigations Directorate in the Novgorod Region – Stanislav Belyansky. He used to be the Head of the Procedural Control Department of the Investigations Directorate of the ICR in the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous District–Yugra. As the CrimeRussia wrote earlier, officers of the Novgorod ICR Directorate, exhausted under the rule of Ekaterina Gilina, have made a desperate move – wrote a collective letter describing outrageous incidents and framed-up criminal cases. In addition, the female general had collected ‘levies’ from the staff on a regular basis.
According to the letter, monetary sanctions imposed on her by superior authorities and administrative fines amerced by the Prosecutor’s Office had been paid at the expense of investigators and other ICR Directorate personnel.
“In the end of 2015, officers of the Directorate have received year-end bonuses and were unhappily surprised to hear that a portion of the premium had to be returned to E.G. Gilina – in total, some 300 thousand rubles. Only those who agreed to give a portion of their money to E.G. Gilina have got maximum bonuses”.
Gilina used to complaint to her subordinates that Alexander Bastrykin, the Chairman of the ICR, had deprived her of the year-end bonus, which seemed “unfair” to her. As per her instructions, two specially appointed officers were collecting money from the personnel. In summer 2016, the staff of the of the Novgorod Investigations Directorate of the ICR also had to chip in 5 thousand rubles each because Ekaterina Gilina had to pay administrative fines imposed on her. Another ‘fundraising event’, this time – “for the needs of the Directorate”, has been carried out in August. Weird things occurred not only with the investigators’ wallets, but also with monetary funds seized in the framework of criminal cases.
“As per instruction of the Chairman of the ICR, the Main Investigations Directorate of the ICR, has performed an audit due to the fact of exceeding official powers by E.G. Gilina with regards to monetary funds seized in the framework of a criminal case. In order to evade criminal liability, E.G. Gilina has instructed her subordinate ***, the senior investigator of the Department for Investigation of Special Cases, to produce backdated, consciously forged procedural documents and provide an intentionally false testimony to the investigator of the Main Investigations Directorate of the ICR”.
There were other original innovations introduced by Gilina in the law enforcement institution. For example, she used – at her own will and contrary to the existing legislation – to recruit persons who were under investigation and grant them access to case files. For instance, in the period of August 1 – November 17, 2016, some N**** had been working in the Investigations Directorate on a contract basis. It is necessary to note that this woman was not an employee of the Investigations Directorate. Still, following Gilina’s instructions, she had reviewed criminal cases, participated in work meetings, including those dedicated to the investigation of criminal cases, and even inspected territorial branches.
During that period, a pre-investigation check against N**** was ongoing due to the fact of exceeding official powers, and then, in November 2016, a criminal case has been initiated against her. According to the personnel of the Novgorod Investigations Directorate, despite these outrageous facts, Gilina, “threatening with dismissal, had forced the Human Resources Department and internal security officers to hire N****”.
When the situation has become really serious, and the pre-investigation check resulted in the initiation of a criminal case, Ekaterina Gilina attempted to burke the issue. She has issued a special order to establish a commission involving officers from the Human Resources Department and Inventory and Logistics Department to seize the criminal case from the investigator. The case file was supposed to be transferred to a trusted aide of Gilina – who allegedly had extensive experience in performing such tasks.
The former Head of the Investigations Directorate of the ICR in the Novgorod Region used to behave as a Russian landowner during the law of serfdom: punished disobedient subordinates, patronized her minions, plotted intrigues, and had joint interests with functionaries from other governmental institutions. The rebelling subordinates have mentioned inter alia the following fact: a person whose father was the Head of the Department of Natural Resources of the Novgorod Region was employed with the Investigations Directorate.
The General Administration of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) in the Nizhniy Novgorod Region was unable to use its operative information against this functionary or take any actions because of his friendly relations with Gilina.
The intervention of the Central ICR Headquarters into the open confrontation between general Ekaterina Gilina and the personnel of the Investigations Directorate has resulted in a long-awaited appointment of a new boss.
According to CrimeRussia sources, Gilina still denies that she had violated rights of her subordinates in any way. According to her, the episodes related to the dismissal of criminal cases (i.e. the case against Nikolai Maslov, the Head of the Malovishersky District Administration) have occurred due to her complicated relations with Andrei Kikot, the Prosecutor of the Novgorod Region, and the ongoing confrontation between the ICR and Prosecutor General’s Office.
In her interview to Argumenty Nedeli (Arguments of the Week) newspaper in October 2016, she has provided the following comment:
“There is a certain bias in the region against the Investigations Directorate of the ICR demonstrated by our supposed colleagues in law enforcement – i.e. subordinates of Mr. A.V. Kikot, the Regional Prosecutor. Why? I don’t know”.
Andrei Kikot, the Prosecutor of the Novgorod Region, was born in 1976 in Leningrad. In 1994–1997, served in the Russian Army; in 1997–1998 – in the Ministry of Internal Affairs. In 1998, started a career in the prosecution as an Investigator of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Kirovsky District of St. Petersburg. Later became a Prosecutor for Overseeing the Investigation and Questioning. Had been promoted to the Deputy Prosecutor of St. Petersburg for Overseeing the Compliance with Legislation at Special Regime Facilities and then to the Head of the Department for Overseeing Procedural Activities of District Departments of the MIA and Justice of the Administration for Overseeing Procedural Activities of the MIA of the Prosecutor’s Office of St. Petersburg. In 2004–2005, was the Prosecutor of the Krasnogvardeisky District of St. Petersburg. Then was the Prosecutor of the Vyborgsky District of St. Petersburg. On December 26, 2011 has been appointed the Prosecutor of the Novgorod Region by a Decree of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.
Broadly speaking, the main idea of that interview was that all the accusations of the Prosecutor’s Office are evidence-free, while Gilina is suffering reprisals for her honest and dedicated work.
The results of the special check carried out by the Moscow commission in the Investigations Directorate of the ICR in the Novgorod Region are also unknown yet.
Once-successful banker Dmitry Ananiev is now successfully fighting against VIP shareholders of Promsvyazbank in the London High Court of Justice. The court has lifted the conservatory attachments earlier imposed on assets of brothers Ananiev following a motion brought by the plaintiffs. According to some information, the judge has made this decision after the banker’s revelations about money laundering schemes used in Russia by his clients, partners, and acquaintances. Why is Dmitry Ananiev taking revenge on his former colleagues and ‘high patrons’?
The investigators found two rifles, including one with an optical sight, seven thousand cartridges, 14 improvised explosive devices, ten grenades, 140 detonators, a rocket-propelled grenade and 14 rounds in the unfinished building.