Broadcast: Livanovičs, a convicted convict in a ‘Latvenergo’ case for bribery, has worked closely with Liepnieks

Content will continue after the ad

Advertising

–

The so-called “Latvenergo” basic process of possible bribery in TEC-2 reconstruction procurement is being considered by the court of first instance for the third year in a row. Former President of Latvenergo Kārlis Miķelsons and former Director of the Power Plant Reconstruction Project Group Ēriks Priednieks, former Vice President Aigars Melko has not been sitting next to the accused for a year. He participates in the case remotely from the prison, where he is serving a sentence for bribery in connection with the episode of Plavinas HPP. Along with Melko, a bribe-giver-consultant Andrejs Livanovičs has already been convicted in this section.

In the main case of Latvenergo, Livanovičs is accused of bribery and money laundering in an organized group. Jurģis Liepnieks, a public relations specialist and former head of the office of Prime Minister Aigars Kalvītis (TP), was questioned in court this week about cooperation with this business consultant. “We have been cooperating with Mr. Livanovich for many, many years. In all sorts of ways – both in that I have advised the companies he represents, and even vice versa that I have had, I remember, there with wind generators for some or “There are some clients where I have asked for the help of Mr. Livanovich. Respectively, we have had cooperation, but now I will not tell you for years now,” Liepnieks testified in court.

Liepnieks’ co-operation with Livanovičs was also recorded in the section of the Latvenergo case that was closed four years ago by the KNAB, about which it was not publicly known until now. It examined events even earlier than in the cases before the court – for the period from the beginning of 2002 to the end of 2005. Miķelsons, Livanovičs and Sven Karlins, the then vice-president of the international energy concern Alstom Holding, were suspected of bribery in connection with the first round of tenders for the reconstruction of Riga TEC-1 and Riga TEC-2.

In 2003, when the applicants for the TEC-1 reconstruction tender were evaluated, Livanovičs was the representative of Alstom Holding in the Baltic States. The anonymised closure decision describes a consultancy contract apparently paid for by Alstom and concluded with a person, L. The decision states that at the end of 2004 Mr L. became head of the Prime Minister’s Office and was relieved of his duties as a member of the company’s board and managing director by his wife. “de facto” made sure that it was a Liepnieks company SIA “Lieta N”.

It follows from the decision of the KNAB that on September 3, 2003, referring to the agreement on the provision of consultations, Liepnieks, as the managing director of “Case N”, signed the first invoice to “Alstom” for 205 thousand euros. After this amount was transferred to the “Case N” account, part of it – 100 thousand euros was transferred to the Livanovich company. During the investigation, KNAB found a draft service agreement in which the Liepnieks firm was a customer, the Livanovičs company a service provider, and the subject of the agreement was consulting “on the dynamics of the industrial equipment market development”.

After testifying in court, Liepnieks pointed to the “de facto” question about the public relations or similar consultations he provided in connection with Latvenergo’s TEC procurements: “Well, therefore, the contracts that I have [tiesā] some incomprehensible contracts from unfamiliar companies were presented – I can’t comment on it. “Asked about the signed contracts, Liepnieks said:” I don’t know … There is nothing like that! “At the time of this interview,” de facto “was not yet known. about Liepnieks’ connection with “Alstom”, which was later punished by the Swiss prosecutor’s office for bribery in several countries, including Latvia.

Later, Liepnieks “de facto” explained in writing that in those years the public relations agency had a normal amount of 250 thousand euros per year from one client. “There were no intermediaries – I have a client, I provide and attract everything I need,” Liepnieks denies that there was only a buffer between Livanovich and Alstom. At the time when he became the head of the office of Prime Minister Kalvitis, he left SIA “Lieta N”, moreover, at that time the contract had already been fully taken over by Livanovič himself. “Obviously, PR was not so important anymore, I don’t remember those circumstances anymore,” says Liepnieks.

Liepnieks was questioned in the courtroom about the events around the second round of TEC-2 in 2010. For example, for an account opened with the offshore company Faust Alpha Management Limited in an Estonian bank, the user rights of which were granted to Liepnieks. In court, Liepnieks was presented with a copy of his passport, which was used to open an account, but Liepnieks did not remember the circumstances in which this could happen.

Public Prosecutor, Prosecutor General’s Office Prosecutor of the Investigation Division of Special Cases Viorika Jirgen “de facto” explained that the interrogation of Liepnieks was related to the section on money laundering. It is clear from the evidence in the case that the offshore companies Faust Alpha Management Ltd and Media Focus Ltd, with which Liepnieks denied in court, were intended as consultants for Livanovic’s Cypriot company Limmarine. This is evidenced by unsigned draft contracts. The plan did not materialize – probably because Miķelsons, Melko and Livanovičs were detained.

“The two companies with which these consultancy contracts with Limmarine were drawn up in 2010 – these offshore companies would have advised Limmarine for one million. However, the invoices already issued were identical. The two were approximately EUR 77 thousand. “It’s exactly the same amount, even though the counselors seemed to be different on paper. But that ‘s the specificity of money laundering, at least in the process, I noticed,” says prosecutor Jürgen.

The prosecutor confirms that in the investigation KNAB also investigated the direction of Latvenergo’s bribe-taking to politicians, but failed to obtain confirmation. Liepnieks also “de facto” claims that without knowing anything about payments to politicians: “Well, as far as I understand, there is no information in the case that there is any involvement of politicians.”

–