The Austrian Supreme Court rejected the appeal of Ukrainian businessman and politician Dmytro Firtash's lawyers against the appellate court's decision to extradite him to the United States. The final decision on Firtash's fate now rests with the Austrian Federal Minister of Justice.
If the minister agrees to extradition, Firtash could appear in an American court as early as July.
What does this court decision mean and how events will develop is analyzed by "The country".
"Washington's political opponent"
Two years and four months have passed since the Vienna Higher Regional Court's first decision on the extradition of Ukrainian businessman and politician Dmytro Firtash to the United States.
Firtash's lawyers insisted that the US extradition request was politically motivated. The trial court upheld this same position in the spring of 2015.
"Dmytro Firtash is a political opponent of Washington," Firtash's lawyer, Dieter Bemdorfer, said during a Supreme Court hearing on Tuesday, June 25, urging the Senate (a panel of judges) of the Supreme Court to deny Firtash's extradition to the United States.
However, the Austrian Supreme Court rejected the lawyers' appeal and their motion to reopen the trial. The court also ignored the arguments of the Austrian prosecutor's office, which opposes extradition.
Firtash's opponents in Ukraine considered the Austrian Supreme Court's decision proof of his guilt. Meanwhile, the presiding judge, on the contrary, pointed out that the Supreme Court does not decide whether Firtash is guilty or not, but only considers the appellate court's compliance with the law in its decision and the possibility of extradition.
Overall, the Supreme Court upheld the decision to extradite Firtash to the United States, although it noted some concerns regarding the appellate court's handling of the case. During the hearing, Firtash declined to make the final statement, joining the statements of his defense attorneys.
Later, Firtash's press service released the position of his lawyers.
"We are disappointed with today's ruling by the Austrian Supreme Court. In any event, nothing has changed regarding Mr. Firtash's innocence and the lack of evidence of his guilt in any crime. He never did business in the United States, never visited the United States, and had no knowledge of any plans to bribe Indian officials regarding Indian titanium deposits, which were never implemented," the statement reads.
The final decision on Firtash's extradition to the United States now rests with Austria's Federal Minister of Justice, 70-year-old Clemens Jabloner, who was appointed to the post just last May. For nearly 20 years, he served as President of the Supreme Administrative Court and as a professor of law at the University of Vienna. In addition to his position as his country's Minister of Justice, he currently serves as Austria's Acting Vice-Chancellor.
According to the extradition treaty between Austria and the United States, the Minister of Justice makes decisions "taking into account Austria's interests and international obligations." Therefore, Clemens Jabloner must coordinate his decision with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which was appointed in May by career diplomat Alexander Schallenberg, who previously headed the EU department in the office of former Prime Minister Sebastian Kurz and, before that, served as spokesman for the Foreign Ministry there.
Commenting on Firtash's trial, Austrian media have already called the Austrian Justice Minister's upcoming decision "political."
"Given the foreign policy relevance of this issue, it was always considered likely that such a decision would only be made in consultation with other members of the federal government," APA noted, estimating that it would take several days. However, Austrian law does not limit the minister's decision-making time.
Thus, it can be taken out either in the coming days or after a long time.
The plot of the case
Dmytro Firtash has been forced to reside in Austria for over five years. In the United States, the businessman is accused of attempting to bribe Indian officials totaling $18,5 million. According to American law enforcement, Firtash used bribes to obtain permits to mine titanium ore in India, and allegedly planned to sell the resulting titanium products to the American company Boeing. Firtash denies the charges, noting that he has never been to the United States. He calls them politically motivated, intended to punish him for his position on the eve of the 2014 Ukrainian presidential election, which ran counter to American interests.
Firtash was arrested in Vienna on March 12, 2014, but was released on bail of €125 million. In April 2015, the Vienna Regional Criminal Court rejected the US Department of Justice's request for Firtash's extradition.
The court ruling cited political motives in the US petition as the reason for the denial. Following the Vienna Regional Court's decision, Firtash's passport was returned. However, the prosecutor's office appealed the decision.
In February 2017, the Vienna Higher Regional Court granted Firtash's extradition. The businessman's defense appealed to the Supreme Court.
During Firtash's extradition trial to Austria in January of this year, a curious detail emerged: American prosecutors based their extradition request on a PowerPoint report from the consulting firm McKinsey for Boeing, which Firtash claims he had never seen.
The New York Times published a report noting that Boeing had asked McKinsey to evaluate the feasibility of titanium mining in India for the 787 Dreamliner. The aircraft manufacturer hoped to use an intermediary to expedite bureaucratic procedures—Bothli Trade, a company owned by Firtash. The report, compiled by McKinsey in 2006, noted that Firtash's plan included "respect for traditional bureaucratic processes, including the use of bribes."
The Ukrainian oligarch also allegedly named eight Indian government officials who could assist Boeing. Their names were published on a slide from a consulting company presentation, which became the key evidence presented by US prosecutors in the case. Prosecutors called this document "clear evidence" that Firtash's company informed Boeing "of a plan to bribe Indian government officials that was already underway."
Almost six months after Firtash's arrest in Vienna, Boeing announced it had abandoned the deal and found another source of titanium. In other words, no bribes were actually paid. However, McKinsey's analysis itself can hardly be considered reliable evidence that such intentions even existed.
Firtash himself denies being willing to pay bribes or having any relationship with McKinsey. Firtash's defense also insists that the United States has no jurisdiction to hear crimes committed in India. However, late last week, federal Judge Rebecca Pallmeier in Chicago refused to dismiss the charges, arguing that the scheme had an impact on Chicago-based Boeing.
The article also cites the arguments of Austrian Judge Christoph Bauer, who previously denied the Americans' request to extradite Firtash. He believed that the real reasons for the US authorities' interest in Firtash were geopolitical. The judge also linked the US efforts to arrest Firtash in late 2013 to his influence over former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, which Washington sought to exploit for its own purposes.
"The Path to Return to Ukraine"
In a letter to Firtash's Chicago trial judge, Rebecca Palmier, Dan Webb, Dmytro Firtash's American lawyer, noted that Firtash could be extradited within seven to ten days of the Justice Minister's decision.
The businessman's lawyers have repeatedly noted that the full text of the indictment against Firtash does not state that he or anyone else is suspected of bribery. Therefore, even if the businessman is extradited to the United States, the case against him could fall apart in court, after which Firtash could return to Ukraine.
"Friends, I wouldn't rush to conclusions about Dmytro Firtash. The extradition process has nothing to do with either the measure of restraint or his guilt," authoritative lawyer Andriy Portnov wrote on his Telegram channel. "Many view today's decision by the Austrian court as negative for him, but I believe it paves the way for a relatively quick conclusion to his entire case and a subsequent, after all the travel and court formalities, peaceful return to Ukraine."
FILE: DMYTRO FIRTASH. THE STORY OF A TERNOPIL BILLIONAIRE
Subscribe to our channels in Telegram, Facebook, Twitter, VC — Only new faces from the section CRYPT!