Putin says Moscow will never accept West’s position on death of Russian medics in SyriaRussian Politics & Diplomacy December 08, 18:44
Court postpones trial of FAS fine against Google until January 18Business & Economy December 08, 18:42
Putin: Russia won’t allow influence from outside through non-profit organizationsRussian Politics & Diplomacy December 08, 18:35
Dutch football club Vitesse denies media reports on Slutsky’s move from CSKA FCSport December 08, 18:03
Putin says it is necessary to combat extremism in social mediaRussian Politics & Diplomacy December 08, 17:36
Putin: Russia must remain secular state in relations with all religionsRussian Politics & Diplomacy December 08, 17:29
Russian Defense Ministry ready to assist in speedy delivery of aid to AleppoMilitary & Defense December 08, 17:22
Lavrov: Russia calls to set up anti-drug unit in OSCERussian Politics & Diplomacy December 08, 17:18
Top diplomat calls on NATO countries to stop military build-up near Russia’s bordersRussian Politics & Diplomacy December 08, 17:17
MOSCOW, January 16 (Itar-Tass) — The Russian Supreme Court demanded that the Russian Investigation Committee should produce the materials of the investigation in the business activities of former State Duma deputy from the A Just Russia faction Gennady Gudkov on Wednesday.
On Wednesday, the Russian Supreme Court held preliminary hearings at the request of the former lawmaker, who challenges his stripping of the deputy seat. The merit court proceedings were scheduled on February 11.
The preliminary court hearings were held in the presence of Gudkov and a representative of the United Russia Party. The judge began a court session with a statement from Vadim Prokhorov, who is a representative of the State Duma and the lawyer of the former deputy and who stated that the plaintiff should prove the violation of Gudkov’s rights. Meanwhile, the State Duma should produce the arguments in favour of the lawfulness of the court verdict to strip Gudkov of his deputy powers.
The court briefed on the positions of the litigating parties and summed up the documents produced by the lower house of parliament.
Lawyer Prokhorov opposed the request for additional materials, particularly from the Russian Investigation Committee.
“The subject of this trial is not whether Gudkov was involved in business activities, but whether or not the State Duma had sound reasons to strip him of the status of deputy. This is why not all documents regarding Gudkov are important for us, but only those documents that are available for the State Duma,” Prokhorov said.
“The fact of Gudkov’s commercial activities should be exposed and proved,” the State Duma representative said, pledging to produce the appropriate evidence during the merit court proceedings.
Hearing the positions of the litigating parties, the court ruled to set the merit court proceedings on February 11 at an open court session and demand the materials of the investigation in Gudkov’s activities from the Investigation Committee by this day.
On September 14, 2012, the State Duma stripped the deputy head of the United Russia faction in the State Duma for his business activities that are illegal for the status of lawmaker.
Before this court verdict the deputies of the Communist Party of Russia and the A Just Russia Party, including the leaders of the factions Gennady Gudkov and Sergei Mironov, asked the Russian Constitutional Court about the provisions of the law on the status of the senator of the Federation Council and the deputy of the State Duma, on the strength of which Gudkov was deprived of the deputy mandate.
The Russian Constitutional Court found constitutional the provisions of the law on the status of the State Duma deputy, under which the lower house of Russian parliament stripped Gudkov of a deputy seat. Meanwhile, the court ruled that the court verdict for the early termination of the deputy powers may be appealed in the Russian Supreme Court. Meanwhile, before the court verdict came in effect the former lawmaker retains his immunity, if the appeal is satisfied he should be reinstated in the status of the deputy.