NATO rejects media claims alliance unable of quick deploymentWorld October 21, 13:01
Russian senior diplomat: Moscow has 'no doubts' that Iran fulfilling JCPOA dealRussian Politics & Diplomacy October 21, 11:04
Monuments to Soviet troops in PolandWorld October 21, 10:57
Putin and Erdogan give positive assessment to joint efforts in Astana processWorld October 21, 3:03
Privileges to certain languages in Ukraine’s education law to worsen situation — diplomatRussian Politics & Diplomacy October 20, 21:46
International balance of forces in Syria after Raqqa’s liberation unclear yet — expertMilitary & Defense October 20, 21:05
Russia to resume import of aubergines, pomegranates from Turkey since October 30Business & Economy October 20, 20:18
International station to orbit Moon at 70,000 km distance from EarthScience & Space October 20, 20:09
US indulging in lies to have UN-OPCW mission’s mandate extended — Foreign MinistryRussian Politics & Diplomacy October 20, 19:31
KIEV, September 27 (Itar-Tass) —— Prosecutor Lilia Frolova demands seven years in prison for ex-Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Timoshenko.
She said Timoshenko’s culpability in the gas case had been proven fully.
“On results of the court deliberations, we ask the court to find Timoshenko guilty and, bearing in mind the severity of her crime, to sentence her to seven years in prison on the basis of paragraph 3, article 365 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, and deny her the right to take certain positions for three years,” Frolova said.
In her words, no circumstances alleviating or exacerbating the culpability of Timoshenko were exposed in the course of the trial.
The prosecution also asked the court to meet the claim of Neftegaz Ukrainy for 1.51 billion hryvni (about $200 million).
The court recessed until September 28.
The culpability of Timoshenko in the gas case is proven fully, Frolova said.
The court declined the appeal of the Timoshenko defense for resuming the juridical investigation. Presiding Judge Rodion Kireyev said that the parties to the trial had considered every piece of evidence and documents to which the Timoshenko side had referred.
Timoshenko was accused of the illegal signing of gas contracts with Russia in 2009. The Prosecutor General’s Office said that she abused of office and caused more than 1.5 billion hryvni (about $200 million) damage to Ukraine.
Ukraine cannot secede from gas agreements with Russia signed by Yulia Timoshenko, Ukrainian Prime Minister Nikolai Azarov told the court, as he was giving testimony in the Timoshenko case.
“When I read that agreement I could not believe it had been approved by the government. The terms of that document make unilateral secession practically impossible,” he said.
The penalty for taking less gas than contracted “is harmful for the national economy,” and the pricing formula set for the period of ten years is unprofitable, Azarov said.
“The agreement betrayed the country and caused an increase of public utility charges,” he concluded.
The Russia-Ukraine gas deal 2009 strictly complies with national laws, the Russian Foreign Ministry said immediately after the arrest of Timoshenko.
“Bearing in mind the decision of the Kiev Pechersky District Court to arrest Yulia Timoshenko who is accused by the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s Office of exceeding her authority in the signing of contracts on Russian gas supply in 2009, the Russian Foreign Ministry states the following: all the gas agreements of 2009 were signed in strict compliance with the national laws of both states and international laws and their signing was preceded by instructions from the presidents of Russia and Ukraine,” the ministry said.
The trial of Timoshenko “must be fair and unbiased, meet every provision of Ukrainian laws and provide appropriate defense and compliance with elementary humanitarian norms and rules,” the ministry said.
The Kiev Pechersky District Court repeatedly rejected the appeals for releasing Timoshenko from custody.
The trial started on June 24, and Timoshenko was arrested on August 5 for ‘hampering the establishment of truth.’