Ten people were arrested who are suspected of complicity in the murder of Anna Politkovskaya. In connection with this an official announcement was made: the crime has been solved.
That isn’t so.
First, far from all those involved in Anna’s murder have been arrested.
Second, the guilt of those who were already arrested has still to be proved. Our own investigation makes it possible to suppose that each of these people, to some extent individually, actually was involved in the crime, but the prosecutors still face protracted, routine work: interrogations, confrontations, additional searches. The trial will not take place tomorrow nor even this year.
Third, the question about who ordered the murder is open.
There is also the fourth point, the most important: the leaking of information which was organized in the mass media, by someone — out of a desire to earn something, and by someone — exclusively for the sake of hindering the investigation from clarifying all the circumstances of the contract murder of the journalist and the circumstances of a whole series of other crimes.
In fact, since 27 August, in the prosecutor’s office, the MVD [Ministry of Internal Affairs – translator’s note], and the FSB [Federal Security Service – translator’s note] the day of open doors has been declared, everything merges: the names, the circumstances of the arrest, previous criminal cases, connections and various versions. Even the seditious thought has appeared: “hasn’t the one who ordered the murder and his protectors started to bustle about and make a fuss?”
The first arrests have been made of suspects in the murder of Anna Politkovskaya and the mystery of the investigation has already been divulged.
Until 27 August — the press conference of the general prosecutor and the announcements of officers of the special forces — the people arrested didn’t know who else was detained, apart from themselves. Moreover, after the leak the criminals who remain at liberty know the “entire list” and they can figure out the main direction of the inquiry making them fully capable of going into hiding. The first arrests began on 13 August, they were carefully prepared over a long period and there were no leaks of information: the investigation envisioned carrying out unexpected confrontations, interrogations and identifications. The lawyers of the arrested men were warned not to reveal secrets of the investigation. Now it has become clear that all these precautionary measures were in vain. Obviously, someone had the desire to dispose of the list of criminals. That’s one issue. And not to make the other crimes known which, in our opinion, the persons already arrested could have committed. Because the list of “extras” in these other cases could turn out to be very unexpected. That’s a second issue.
The general prosecutor was very careful at the press conference, if we don’t take note of his passages about the one who ordered the murder and allusions to the complicity of members of the police and the FSB in the murder. Kuryazhkin, the director of the department of personal security of the FSB of the Russian Federation, was the first to divulge the secrets of the investigation. He announced the name of the arrested Lieutenant Colonel Pavel Ryaguzov.
In our view, this is one of the most curious figures in the investigation of the murder of Anna Politkovskaya and, as it seems, not of this crime alone. The latter supposition follows from the statements of the FSB officers themselves, who assert: Lt. Col. Ryaguzov long ago came into their field of vision, and he wasn’t the only one. How long ago, one would like to know? In connection with what? After all, the first mention that we know about of FSB agent Ryaguzov relates to 2004 — in connection with suspicions of exceeding his official authority. Already at that time he was well acquainted with Sergei Khadzhikurbanov, an agent of the ethical section of the UBOP [Directorate for Combating Organised Crime - translator’s note]. This surname appeared on the published list of those arrested in the Politkovskaya case on 28 August, and details about it on the 29th. Khadzhikurbanov was convicted precisely in 2004. Four years of imprisonment were replaced with two by the Zamoskvoretskii court, and Khadzhikurbanov was released in August 2006.
After the release of the name of the arrested special forces agent — there was a breakthrough: on Internet sites there began to appear variations of lists of those who were arrested, identikit pictures of the presumed killer, frames shot by video surveillance cameras installed at the entrance to the building on Lesnaya Street, and photographs of the director of the investigative team, Petr Garibyan. The secrecy of the investigation was violated, and the presumption of innocence of the arrested men — in a word, today everything is done in order to impede the investigation and to provide the suspects’ lawyers with a good line of defence.
For 10 months there had been no serious leak of information – this, if we speak frankly, is a most rare phenomenon in contemporary practice. The director of the investigative team followed this painstakingly, for his part and we, for our part. Even journalists who represent the interests of the special forces in various publications were compelled to occupy themselves exclusively with versions based on guesswork. But as soon as the preliminary results of the investigation landed on the desks of the numerous directors, both civilian and military, it turned out to be impossible to preserve secrecy.
And all information should have been kept in the strictest secrecy: Khadzhikurbanov’s and Ryagusov’s connections are too broad, they are too much “system” people. If we go through the data base which the MVD agents amalgamated for public sale, then it’s possible to find strange coincidences: for example, how did Khadzhikurbanov’s service telephone number find its way into the memorandum book of a well-known bandit? Or, how is the “highlighted” telephone number in the investigation of the explosion of a McDonald’s restaurant related to people arrested in the Politkovskaya murder case? Or — who asked agents of the FSB’s central apparatus to establish Anna Politkovskaya’s real place of residence in August 2006 and what is the relationship of GUBOP [Central Directorate for Combating Organised Crime - translator’s note] officers to this?
These are only four questions, answers to which we may never receive, because of the massive leak of information that occurred: alas, a purposeful disclosure of materials of the case has already led to irreversible consequences for the establishment of the truth. What was required, if it was not possible to hinder the investigation at the preliminary stage?
Quite a number of strange people circled around the investigation of the “Novaya’s” journalists all this time: a murky, opaque set of professional provocateurs, former and current officers of the special forces, informers, bandits. Many of them afterward surfaced as the chief “sources” of information in other notorious criminal cases: Kovtun, Zharko. Others cobbled together false versions. There was the sense of a well thought-out special operation — to the credit of the investigation, it was unsuccessful. But now we have the feeling that this special operation went into another phase: plan B – in reserve.
The practice of the special forces which is now actively imitated in the MVD is like this: any exposed agent is dismissed immediately, before official charges are brought against him. As a rule, the agents themselves, who know about “concepts of corporate ethics”, write a report on the dismissal. In this case it was said that Ryaguzov was an active agent of the UFSB for Moscow and the Moscow Region (we add on our own: the “ethics” section of the UFSB). The FSB hands over its own people only when they violate the rules: Ryaguzov didn’t want to be a “former” agent, but wasn’t he sure that he could prove his innocence? Not very likely, he’s not a child. Did he have “trumps” and think that they would win? Closer to the truth: it was possible to bargain. After all, it’s simpler to acknowledge the presence of individual “freaks”, in the figurative expression of the general prosecutor, than to dig deeply into their connections – isn’t that so?
We don’t want to play with conspiracy theory. The reason why they are trying to ruin the case is not at all to be found in some plot, it’s simple — corruption, the total intertwining of the law-enforcement system with crime.
Precisely this, in particular, also put behind bars the Moscow GUVD [Main Department of Internal Affairs - translator’s note] agents who were detained on suspicion of complicity in Politkovskaya’s murder. In addition to the “former” Khadzhikurbanov, there are three of them. Thanks to our security personnel’s press conferences, the whole world found out that besides the illegal “eavesdropping” (the case of the high-ranking MUR [Moscow Criminal Investigation Department - translator’s note] officer Orlov, now in court), in Russia there is also illegal “observation”. Of course, people knew about this a long time ago — whoever needed it used it, since it wasn’t very expensive: 100 dollars an hour — and the administration could lament that they didn’t have enough personnel for the surveillance of criminals.
Analyzing the circumstances of Anna’s death, we established an approximate picture of the crime. The intermediaries received the order, most probably, in spring-summer of 2006, to follow Politkovskaya closely, and began in the first days of October, and before this, again making use of the capabilities of the special forces’ agents, established her actual place of residence — she had recently moved to the flat on Lesnaya Street. They followed Anna from morning to evening: her car and the foyer of the block of flats. In general, considering the number of those concealed and open threats that she constantly received, Anya was very cautious — she informed the editorial staff of “Novaya” about all “peculiarities” that happened to her and her relatives.
But at the end of August and in September she stopped being cautious: her mother was in the hospital, they had buried her father – and Anya’s itinerary, in contrast to usual working days, was practically the same. In the morning she took the dog for a walk, then went to the shops and visited her mother, during the day she went back home, walked the dog, closer to evening she went to the hospital again. When your family members have problems you pay less attention to yourself, although Anya also mentioned something about the strange people that she encountered on the staircase.
They, or more likely he, really did go there. We think that the killer actually went into the foyer several times (at least twice), together with Politkovskaya, in order to make a recognisance visit, before 7 October 2006 at 16:01 when he fired five shots at Anna (she had just stepped into the lift). Two bullets were shot at her head: the first and a control shot. A converted “IZh” gas pistol with a silencer was left, and the scene of the crime — its “biography” was established. It was “clean”, which couldn’t be said for its twin brothers, also converted military cartridges from the PM. The killer ran out of the foyer (these frames were also put into the hands of journalists by someone then, which very seriously impeded the investigation), got into his car and left the site of the crime.
As you understand, behind this chronicle of the crime, which is far from being complete, a multitude of details is hidden, which we think cannot be revealed yet. Is it necessary to explain why we also have been silent all this time?
The number of people arrested and those who (we hope so, in any event) will still be arrested, leads to several observations. First, the investigation led the general prosecutor’s office and us to two (at least) permanent criminal gangs that cooperate “fruitfully” with each other — the same merger of law-enforcement structures and crime about which Anna herself wrote numerous times, the same permissiveness which prompts warrant officers and majors to use their official powers for their own profit. We emphasize: many years of joint business, based on committing serious and especially grave crimes. If one starts to untangle this knot, then the details of many notorious criminal cases can be revealed, which up to now have not been solved. Only, judging by past events, they will try to see to it that just this is not permitted.
Second, Politkovskaya’s murder was scrupulously prepared: professionals were at work, who already had experience in “resolving similar problems”.
Third, this was expensive. And this last assumption leads naturally to the question of who the person was who ordered the murder. For now we omit the question: not because we have nothing to say about it, but because talking about this is premature. There is great danger in pre-election special operations around the circumstances of Politkovskaya’s murder, which was demonstrated by the general prosecutor’s press conference, when he actually quoted the Russian Federation’s president, who three days after the murder already gave to the prosecutor’s office the desired direction of the search for the main criminal. “Some forces living abroad who are interested in destabilizing the situation in Russia”.
“Some forces” are known by name. Presidential assistant Shuvalov spoke about this more transparently and so did Kadyrov, the Chechen president — and they make no mystery of it at all: Berezovskii. (Neither Shuvalov nor Kadyrov have been interrogated yet, although they should be interrogated in an official manner, since they know something.) Incidentally the “exile” himself does everything possible in order to confirm this version in the eyes of the general public: sometimes we have the impression that they come to an agreement somewhere over there about synchronizing their activities. The call to revolution from London in fact coincided with the press conference where the “revolutionary” was accused of complicity in contract murders.
We do not exclude the possible involvement of “fugitive oligarchs”, likewise of a whole number of other personalities: there are several versions about the one who ordered Politkovskaya’s murder. For example, it appears to us that the one who gave the contract for the murder has not left Russia. But it is premature to speak of this — we would like to obtain irrefutable proof. And it would be better to end speculation around the question of who ordered the murder: political public-relations games are still being played around the investigation, on the one hand, and on the other, corrupt officers of the special forces and law-enforcement agencies are covering their tracks. There are no guarantees that the names of all those who carried out the crime and those who really ordered it will be revealed in court.
We have repeated many times that we have no claims on those who solve the murder of “Novaya’s” journalist. We cooperate and do so very fruitfully. We want to be sure that nothing will affect this joint work. The result is obvious: both the actual killers and their accomplices should be established, judged, and should serve out their full prison term.
In general we very often heard the question and the reproach: “why does it take so long?”
About the time periods. Anna Politkovskaya published more than 500 articles in “Novaya”. Almost every one of them could have been a cause or a reason. And these were not only materials related to Chechnya. The geography is broad: Daghestan, Kabardino-Balkaria, Astrakhan, Bashkiria, St. Petersburg, Moscow. Therefore, there were very many initial versions. One of the first — the possible complicity of Lapin (called the “cadet”), an officer of the Khanty-Mansiisk OMON, who had already threatened Polikovskaya and who is now on trial in Chechnya. His accomplices were in the federal inquiry -- also MVD officers, Major Prilepin and Lieutenant Colonel Minin: of course there were questions put to them about the murder of Politkovskaya. While they were searching for them, they communicated with the press. As a result, they found one in Nizhnevartovsk: he never even thought of going into hiding, he lived at home, served there in the same rank and the same position, what kind of federal inquiry is that? It was revealed: there is no connection with the murder of Politkovskaya. Concerning all the rest, a separate statement was written out by the prosecutor. All the rest is what we started out with: absolute lack of control and corruption of the law-enforcement agencies and special forces.
Then — the scandal of the murder of Baisarov, a former Chechnya MVD officer and special forces agent. The mayor of Grozny, Bislan Gantamirov, came to the editorial office once in the autumn of last year. He declared: three groups of killers are operating in Moscow. One was stalking him, another was hunting for Baisarov, the third was “working” on Politkovskaya. He named names and reported that one of the groups was by chance detained by agents of the Khamovnichesk UVD.
It became clear that not all the listed persons were connected to the murder of Politkovskaya. But it also turned out that three Chechens, agents of the republic’s MVD, really were detained by the Khamovnichesk UVD, without instructions and warrants, but with a “killer’s set” in the boot of the car, which included large-calibre rifles with telegraphic sights for shooting at automobiles armoured against ordinary bullets. An officer of the central apparatus of the FSB, First Captain Bazhanov, tried to save them, but he was unsuccessful. A supplementary examination was started which, according to our information, ended without any results. The men who were detained were preparing for some kind of action outside of Moscow and even outside Russia.
Yes, all of this did not have any relationship to the murder of Anna Politkovskaya. But Baisarov was killed anyway, a week after Gantamirov’s visit to the editorial office, at which were present, in accordance with our request, officers of the central apparatus of the MVD.
In general, much of what came together around the investigation, both ours and the official one: the provokers who tried to muddle the traces, to explain what was known to the investigation, and to mislead people; extortioners who were hoping for the reward announced by Aleksandr Lebedev, a newspaper shareholder; and the threats — all these are additional details, having no direct relationship to the case, but throwing light on the structure of the world of the special forces, who are related to crime. We will tell about this later, when the most important thing has been done.
And so that the most important things shall be done, we try to undertake everything that depends on us. In particular, in contrast to the leadership of the prosecutor’s office and the FSB, we will remain silent about circumstances that are known to us: too many criminal cases are divulged on the pages of newspapers, too few are brought to a verdict.
The investigation worked against this background. This relates to the question “Why does it take so long?” Good quality demands time (and good-quality work and highly professional work has been done). And it is necessary to wait for a while yet – as long as needed so that the verdict, in spite of the open attempts to impede the investigation, would be indisputable and would not deviate from the truth. That is, of course, if the investigation is permitted to bring the case to a conclusion, and they do not make some sort of deal with the criminals.
The article was prepared with the participation of Vyacheslav Izmailov, Dmitrii Muratov and Ilya Politkovskii.
PRINT THIS PAGE 
BACK TO LAST PAGE