North Korea test fires another missileWorld May 29, 1:29
Russia’s Zvyagintsev wins Jury Prize at 70th Cannes Film Festival with his LovelessSociety & Culture May 28, 21:32
Three Russian tourists hurt is road accident with tourist minibus in TurkeySociety & Culture May 28, 18:58
Some 40,000 cyclists taking part in Moscow cycle paradeSociety & Culture May 28, 18:33
Corporation Irkut: MS-21 first flight performed in routine modeBusiness & Economy May 28, 16:54
Ukrainian military launch more than 180 shells, mines on Donetsk within one dayWorld May 28, 16:36
Minister: Russia may supply 1,000 MC-21 planes to 2037Business & Economy May 28, 14:42
Lavrov: China, ASEAN interested in organization of Eurasian partnershipRussian Politics & Diplomacy May 28, 11:45
MC-21 airliner makes first test flight - sourceBusiness & Economy May 28, 11:00
MOSCOW, December 27. /ITAR-TASS/. The Tverskoy court in Moscow has found lawful the opening of a criminal case versus Deputy Chairman of the Russian state-owned bank Vnesheconombank (VEB) Anatoly Baloo, who is accused of abuse of power.
Thus, the court has turned down an appeal, which the lawyer of the defendant had filed against the opening of the criminal case and the launching of separate court proceedings.
The court has found the action of the detective lawful, Judge Tatiana Neverova said in a court ruling.
“The Moscow city court will appeal the today’s court ruling,” Ballo’s lawyer Igor Khadartsev said.
The Moscow city court has cancelled two rulings by the Tverskoy court and has brought back the appeal for repeated hearings.
Ballo was accused of theft of 14 million dollars, which made part of a credit, which Vnesheconombank had allocated to the company Evraziisky (Eurasian) to buy the full authorised capital of the company Yugvodokanal. The police stated later that “the fact of theft of the VEB monetary funds in the taking of a credit by Evraziisky Ltd. was not confirmed.” Finally, the accusation against Ballo was changed from a massive fraud to the abuse of powers. The detectives found that the banker had acted against the VEB interests.