To: Dmitry A. Medvedev
President of the Russian Federation

Dear Dmitry Anatolyevich,

I am turning to you in connection with an extremely unhealthy situation which has
formed at the present time in the Investigation Committee of the Prosecutor's Office
(SKP) of the Russian Federation. Essentially, it's a question of the discrediting of the
idea of creating an independent investigative body and separating the functions of
supervision and investigation in the bodies of the prosecutor's office.
On September 12, 2007, that is, at the outset of the functioning of the Investigative
Committee of the Prosecutor's Office, I was appointed director of the Main
Investigative Department (GSU) -- the leading division of the SKP.
Thus, the establishment of the SKP took place before my eyes; many key decisions
were undertaken by me personally.
I must say that during that period, I was connected through the most trusting
relations with A.I. Bastrykin, head of the SKP, under whose direction I worked from
2001 in various executive bodies, and in 2006-2007, I was his assistant for special
assignments, as the Russian Federation's Deputy Prosecutor General. It was in fact
at the suggestion of A.I. Bastrykin that I took up the post of director of the GSU SKP.
Bastrykin saw me as his trusted person and evidently counted on the fact that I
would be an obedient executor of his will.
At first, when the Investigative Committee was just getting started in its work, I
sincerely believed that A.I. Bastrykin intended in his activity to be guided
exclusively by the requirements of the law; however the further unfolding of events
indicated otherwise.
Unfortunately, I am forced to state that the Investigative Committee, as an
independent body performing its activity on the principle of impartiality and
objectivity, has not been established. On the contrary -- its chairman -- A.I. Bastrykin
-- has completely fallen under the influence of several heads of intelligence services
and the Investigative Committee has virtually turned into a branch of the FSB
[Federal Security Service] of Russia.
In particular, the entire personnel policy of the Investigative Committee is
determined by V. P. Maksimenko, head of the Main Department for Personal
Security, Internal Investigations and Physical Defense (the USB), who previously
held the position of deputy head of Department M [counterintelligence] of the FSB.
The main backbone of the USB consists of émigrés from the FSB. All of them are
appointment to leading posts, both in the CKP staff, as well as locally, in accordance
with FSB agencies. Furthermore, A.I. Bastrykin even proposed introducing at the CKP
a staff seconded from the FSB which directly contradicts the Law on the Prosecutor's
Office of the Russian Federation.

 It was at V.P. Maksimenko's insistence that 20% of the investigators of the special
cases, who previously worked in the Department for Investigation of Special Cases
of the Prosecutor General's Office, were now transferred to the staff of the SKP,
despite the fact that each one of them had been working on complicated, highprofile criminal cases (the cases regarding B.A. Berezovsky, Evroset, "Social
Initiative" and so on). There were compromising materials on these investigators
based on spurious statements by V.P. Maksimenko. A.I. Bastrykin completely
supported this decision.
This flawed practice, whereby operations materials [i.e. surveillance reports] from
the FSB were perceived by the leadership of the SKP as truth in the final instance,
gained wide dissemination not only in the matter of selecting personnel but in the
area of preliminary investigation.
Repeatedly, operations materials from the FSB, regardless of the presence of an
evidentiary basis, became the main and only basis for opening of criminal cases. In
addition, A.I. Bastrykin gave direct orders to open up such cases at any price.
Thus, in September 2007, A.I. Bastrykin handed to me a number of operations
materials regarding a group of officials from the Federal Narcotics Service (FSKN) of
Russia, which had come from the Department of Personal Security of the FSB. The
materials appeared to be operations notices, memoranda notices and reports of
activities of wire-tapped telephone conversations (PTP).
A.I. Bastrykin set a specific task to open a criminal case against A.A. Bylbov, head of
the Department of Operational Support for the FSKN, Yu.N. Geval, first deputy head
of the Department of Personal Security of the FSKN and a number of their
subordinates.
Even so, there were no specific data indicating the commission of unlawful acts by
the persons named, and the materials provided by the FSB were not reviewed.
I had understood that if a criminal case would be opened only on the basis of
operations materials, the Prosecutor General will abolish such a decision as
unlawful. In that connection, A.I. Bastrykin ordered to find any criminal case under
investigation, in the framework of which these officers of the FSKN could be brought
to criminal liability, which I was forced to accept.
A criminal case regarding USTM GUVD officials was chosen as a "launching pad,"
which accused them of unlawful wiretapping of the telephone conversations of
citizens. This case by order of A.I. Bastrykin was requested from the SKP of the
Central Administration District of Moscow and transferred to the GSU KSP.
At the same time, operational officers of the FSB of Russia put pressure on one of
the suspects in the case, who in exchange for a guarantee of release from criminal
liability, gave testimony about how he had supposedly been a middleman between
officers of the FSKN and the Department of Special Technical Activities of the Main
Department of Interior (USTM GUVD) in placing unlawful "orders" for wiretapping
telephone conversations for monetary compensation.

 Immediately after this, orders were prepared for searches of four officers of the
FSKN, they were detained and arrested. In fact, there was no direct evidence
proving they had committed unlawful activity.
For the purpose of preventing the lawful interference on the part of the Prosecutor
General, A.I. Bastrykin issued an order that using any excuse, no materials of the
criminal case should be given in response to its inquiries.
The main motivation for bringing Bulbov and others to court was the effort of a
number of high-ranking officials of the FSB to get suspended the operations side of
criminal cases on furniture smuggling (the Tri Kita and Liga-Mars cases) and the
smuggling of consumer goods from China, which the FSKN was involved in.
These criminal cases had provoked serious concern on the part of certain FSB
leaders since they contained a fair amount of materials proving their protection of
the organizers of the crimes cited. All the arrested officers of the FSKN were directly
coordinating the operations support of these cases.
As a result of their arrests, the operations support for these cases was transferred
from the FSKN to the FSB and Interior Ministry, as a consequence of which, the
investigation activity was essentially reduced to nil.
Moreover, A.I. Bastrykin gave the order to remove the case of the furniture
contraband by unidentified employees of Liga-Mars, Ltd. from V.V. Loskutov, deputy
head of the SKP's Investigative Department for Leningrad Region, who had been
assigned to the Prosecutor General's Office since 2002, and then to the GSU SKP,
and to transmit the case to S.E. Deptitsky, GSU senior investigator for special cases.
Despite my objections regarding the removal of V.V. Loskutov, who had been
brought in to investigate this case by the personal order of V.V. Putin, A.I. Bastrykin
announced that the issue of the removal of the criminal case from the investigator
had been decided personally by the President of the Russian Federation, and
Loskutov himself had taken to drink and was not doing any concrete work.
At the same time, for the purposes of discrediting V.V. Loskutov, FSB officers
initiated the writing by those charged with the Tri Kita criminal case, A.Yu. Sayenko
and Ye.O. Leladze, of statements in which they accused V.V. Loskutov of covering up
the facts of criminal activity by a number of officials, who were supposedly the
organizers of the furniture smuggling.
According to available information, the question of opening a criminal case against
V.V. Loskutov, on the basis of these statements, is being decided by A.I. Bastrykin,
which enables the final disavowing of the results of five years of work of the
investigation operations group, and which will enable both criminal cases to fall
apart.
In particular, the conflict has been notable for an attempt at an objective
investigation at the GSU of a criminal case on the grounds of an attempt on the life
of N.N. Aulov, a high-ranking official of the North West Department to Combat
Organized Crime (currently he is head of the North West District Interior Ministry
Department). During the course of the investigation, serious doubts arose as to

 whether the attempt in fact took place, in connection with which a theory about its
possible staging was checked. Information about the ties of N.N. Aulov to
representatives of the "Tambov" and "Malyshev" organized crime associations was
also obtained through the investigation.
After my report of these facts to A.I. Bastrykin, he ordered to immediately send the
criminal case to the SKP investigative department for St. Petersburg with the
purpose of stopping it. The reason for this decision was A.I. Bastrykin's personal
friends with N.N. Aulov. A.I. Bastrykin's instruction was issued, but in connection
with publications in the press that appeared on this topic, the criminal case was not
sent to St. Petersburg. At the present time on A.I. Bastrykin's orders, it has been
stopped.
A serious conflict with A.I. Bastrykin and me arose during the review of materials
that came in from the FSB about the alleged illegal activity of S.A. Storchak, RF
deputy minister of finance, during negotiations conducted by him regarding the
return of the RF state debt to the Government of Kuwait. According to these
materials, instructions were repeatedly issued to refuse to open a criminal case,
which categorically did not suit A.I. Bastrykin.
As a result, at his insistence, the criminal case was nevertheless opened up and
joined to another criminal case under investigation regarding S.A. Storchak.
Subsequently, this instruction on the opening of the criminal case was justifiably
cancelled by the Prosecutor General's office as unlawful.
Thus, by March 2008, A.I. Bastrykin had developed serious dissatisfaction with my
actions. If at first apparently he believed that I will fulfill any of his instructions, after
a half-year period of joint work, the chairman of the SPP [Bastrykin] was convinced
that I don't wish to be a blind weapon in his hands.
It must be noted that A.I. Bastrykin's dissatisfaction with my non-compliance was
artificially "fueled" by the leadership of the SKP USB since V.P. Maksimenko counted
on getting appointed to the post of head of the GSU a more management person
dependent on him.
On March 20, 2008, I was unexpectedly summoned to the office of A.I. Bastrykin and
in the presence of V.P. Maksimenko and A.V. Voronkov, head of the personnel
department of the SKP, that I was being removed from performance of my official
deputies and in connection with the receipt of reports of SKP investigators Z.Z.
Lozhis and S.M. Cheryshov, I was accused of taking bribes for destroying criminal
cases.
Despite the lack of evidence and the absurdity of the charges claimed, on the same
day, at A.I. Bastrykin's order, an internal inspection began of me by the SKP USB. I
do not rule out that my removal was inspired also in order to pin on me a whole
number of abuses and mistakes committed by A.I. Bastrykin as chairman of the SKP
in conducting criminal cases.

 During the course of the inspection by officers of the Main Directorate of the Interior
Ministry for the Central Federal District (director, N.N. Aulov) a demonstrative
external surveillance was unlawfully placed on me; my movements were openly
accompanied by several automobiles; there was surveillance put on the house
where I reside. Regarding this matter, I was forced to appeal to Prosecutor General
Yu.R. Chaika.
Although no violations by me of my official duties were discovered in the course of
the inspection. on April 21, 2008, by decree of the SKP chairman, I was unlawfully
relieved of the post I held and dismissed from the SKP on discrediting grounds. In
turn, the duties of the GUSB director were placed on S.I. Markelov, the deputy head
of the GUSB SKP, which indirectly confirms the fact of the interest of the director of
the GUSM in my removal.
A week later, on April 29, 2008, on the same grounds, my former subordinates were
fired from the SKP unlawfully on the same grounds; A.G. Novikov, the first deputy
director of the GSU; S.S. Glukhikh, director of one of the departments, and Yu.Yu.
Yermakov, a special cases investigator, regarding which we all appealed to the court
with petitions to be reinstated at work.
I want to emphasize that the Prosecutor General's Office also conducted an
inspection of the legality of my actions as director of the GSU regarding the criminal
cases being handled by the investigators Z.Z. Lozhis and S.M. Chernyshov.
According to the results of the inspection, no violations of the law in my actions
were discovered.
At the present time, I have learned that a criminal case has been opened at the GSU
SKP regarding I.V. Kligman, accused in one of the criminal cases under investigation
by the Main Directorate, who allegedly committing unlawful actions aimed at giving
bribes to me and A.G. Novikov. I am convinced that this case was unlawfully
opened, with the purpose of my discreditation and putting pressure on the court
reviewing the case about my reinstatement at work.
Respected Dmitry Anatolyevich! My appeal to you is dictated not by offense at A.I.
Bastrykin or a desire to settle scores, but exclusively by the interests of the cause.
I am convinced that the style of work of the Investigative Committee of the Russian
Federation Prosecutor's Office under the direction of A.I. Bastrykin is deeply flawed,
and will lead to massive abuses and violations of civil rights and liberties, and
therefore I demand your immediate intervention.
Respectfully yours,
D.P. Dovgiy
State Justice Advisor, 3rd Class
19 May 2008