The real question is why third-party “journalism” from fucking Forbes was used to justify sanctions in the first place.
And I mean, using that information is fine as a basis for investigation would have been fine, it’s just that they should have checked it’s true before imposing sanctions.
Whether he’s actually “innocent” is one thing, but apparently it at least couldn’t be proven to a such degree that a court would be satisfied. It’s good to keep in mind that he’s still an oligarch, though; he has a lot of money and power to throw around
In a German court? Even Russian oligarchs have limited reach in German courts, particularly with their funds being frozen and their associates being closely watched.
Oh absolutely, but it doesn’t have to be nefarious; I meant that they can afford to have good lawyers, accountants etc with questionable ethics on their payroll and first of all try to make sure you’re not easily caught doing whatever it was he is accused of (don’t remember anymore), and who will represent him in courts etc. You know, regular super-rich people shit 😁
Generally even if someone wasn’t found guilty of something in a court, you can’t necessarily assume that they didn’t do whatever they were charged with – all that tells by itself is that guilt couldn’t be proven to a level the court was happy with. You’d have to know more details to be able to judge (har har) whether it’s likely they really are innocent or not.
I don’t remember what it was he supposedly did to get sanctioned, nor if the article has any details about the proceedings, so his “innocence” could well be a more or less proven deal, so I mean the above more in a general sense than specifically related to this particular case
