Udmurt Acting Government Chairman detained
Rafis Kasimov had been in the office for less than six months.
Law enforcers have detained Udmurt Government Chairman Rafis Kasimov. According to Kommersant, there have been no official statements from the law enforcement agencies yet. The reasons for the detention have not been named either.
Notably, it was just last February that Kasimov was assigned to the post. He oversees the work of the Ministry of Transport and Road Economy, the Ministry of Forestry, the Ministry of Industry and Trade, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, and the Ministry of Energy, Housing and Communal Services in the republic.
In 2016, he became acting deputy chairman of the government, and before that, he had been heading the local Ministry of Forestry for 10 years.
We should remind that the former head of Udmurtia Alexander Soloviev was detained last April, being accused of taking bribes of 140 million rubles ($2.3m). Recently, he confessed to the crime (although not to the amount) in the hope of getting out of the pre-trial detention facility, where he has been kept from the moment of his arrest. However, the court left him in custody.
Today reports came that property of Soloviev and his two daughters had been arrested. According to the TASS that cited a source familiar with the case file, it was a security arrest for eight apartments in Moscow and Izhevsk, a house in Kamennoye village, two land plots in Udmurtia and a car. Most of the property belongs to Soloviev’s eldest daughter. About two million rubles ($33.200) was seized from Udmurt ex-Head himself during the search.
Private game reserves became a bon ton among Russian politicians and businessmen. A couple of years ago, the Law On Hunting has been significantly amended and it became virtually impossible to join the privileged ‘hunters club’. So, who managed to acquire personal hunting lands and how much it costs?
This is stated in the indictment of the Prosecutor's Office. The defense of the ex-Minister asked to return the case to the supervisory authority, as the factual allegations changed, but the court refused to do so.