The Panama Papers, Dan Gertler – Concordia Marketing Group Inc., HSBC, Benny Steinmetz and Mining

Loose-diamonds

THE GERTLER STEINMETZ CONNECTION PANAMA PAPERS, 2015

If you will recall, a while back Dan Gertler’s name was mentioned in connection with our article regarding the Panama Papers.  That article was more about what was not mentioned than what was. It should not go unnoticed that there dozens of reports about Mr. Gertler’s financial shenanigans, alleged money laundering, various bank accounts, hidden companies and his connection (or alleged lack thereof) to Benny Steinmetz.
Recent articles about Dan Gertler seem to forget or perhaps avoid the intriguing ways in which Mr. Gertler’s name shows up in the same places as Daniel Steinmetz, another remarkable pillar of Jewish society. The connections go back years, numerous documents in the files of the Panama Papers and an extensively tied web of mining operations worldwide. We post one such example, more to follow.
-LM

 

Diamond Dealers in Deep Trouble as Bank Documents Shine Light on Secret Ways

https://www.icij.org/project/swiss-leaks/diamond-dealers-deep-trouble-bank-documents-shine-light-secret-ways

Also in the files is Dan Gertler, an Israeli diamond dealer and close friend of Congolese President Joseph Kabila. He reportedly got his big start trading arms for diamonds in African civil wars during the 1990s in violation of UN embargoes. A 2001 UN Security Council report found “very credible sources” who told of a secret deal that, in exchange for a sweetheart deal giving Gertler a monopoly on diamond rights in the Congo, the Israeli “agreed to arrange, through its connections with high-ranking Israeli military officers the delivery of undisclosed quantities of arms as well as training for the Congolese armed forces.”

Mischon de Reya, a London law firm representing Gertler, said in a letter to ICIJ that “our client categorically denies any involvement in the alleged diamonds-for arms trades in Congo in the late 1990s” and that Gertler “has no knowledge of the companies listed in your letter as having these bank accounts.”

“Details of his private affairs are of no legitimate public interest. Our client has, however, always paid all taxes due in every jurisdiction.”

Gertler is listed in the HSBC files as beneficial owner of an account under the name of Concordia Marketing Group Inc., a British Virgin Islands firm. The other beneficial owner of the account was Daniel Steinmetz of the Steinmetz family, one of the biggest HSBC-linked diamond clients of all (Gertler’s lawyers said he is not associated with Daniel Steinmetz). Steinmetz family members appear to have controlled accounts containing nearly half a billion dollars at the bank in 2006/2007. One HSBC banker noted with an exclamation mark that an inactive account belonged to the Daniel Steinmetz group and that the bank expected much new business from him in the next year.  He cautioned that the account was “part of DS Group!!!” Another HSBC banker also noted that Daniel’s mother was very ill and that bank officials would travel to Sardinia, where the Steinmetzes lived four months every year, to visit the family. 

The bankers were not wrong to be excited. One numbered account called 25225 KT with Daniel Steinmetz listed as attorney would eventually have as much as $264 million at HSBC in 2006/2007.

Wildly lucrative deal

Beny Steinmetz

Beny Steinmetz. Photo: YouTube

Steinmetz’s brother Beny offered the prospect of even more business. One of the richest men in Israel and a Gertler business partner, Beny expanded his father’s diamond business into a multi-industry empire. He had major business interests in African warzones, including Angola, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, and in 2008 in Guinea, he made one of the most lucrative deals of all time.

As longtime Guinean dictator Lansana Conté lay dying, he handed Steinmetz half the mining rights to Simandou, the richest iron-ore deposit on earth, wresting it away from the Anglo-Australian giant Rio Tinto. A year later, Steinmetz, who had no experience in iron mining, sold 51 percent of the rights for $2.5 billion. It was almost pure profit. He had paid nothing for the exploration license – in a country whose entire GDP was just $4.5 billion that year – while investing just $160 million in the project.

But a new Guinean government under reformer Alpha Condé suspected that Steinmetz had paid someone for the license to develop Simandou after all – and illicitly. An investigation bankrolled by billionaire George Soros  (whose Open Society Foundations help fund ICIJ) and assisted by former British prime minister Tony Blair through his Africa Governance Initiative found that Steinmetz’s Pentler Holdings had bribed one of the late dictator’s wives, Mamadie Touré, giving her millions of dollars and a 5 percent stake in the project in exchange for her help getting Conté to sign over the rights, according to The New Yorker.

Touré insisted on a signed contract, she later testified, and when word of the documents emerged during the Soros-backed Guinean investigation, which would result in a U.S. probe, Steinmetz agent Frederic Cilins then traveled to Florida to pay Touré up to $11 million to destroy the contract and change her story. Touré was wearing a wire for the FBI, which recorded Cilins telling her that he was acting on the authority of Steinmetz himself. Cilins later pleaded guilty to obstructing a federal bribery investigation.

“BSGR and Beny Steinmetz have consistently denied wrong doing in Guinea,” says Theo Crutcher, a Steinmetz spokesman, adding that “BSGR has taken the Government of Guinea to international arbitration at ICSID [International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes] to defend itself against the allegations that have been made against it,” said Theo Crutcher, a Steinmetz spokesman.

Beny Steinmetz and BSG Resources allege that the documents were forged and that Cilins was trying to destroy the forgeries. But Steinmetz is now himself a target of an ongoing U.S. investigation, along with probes in several other countries, including Guinea, and Switzerland, his latest residence. Steinmetz changed his official residence from Israel to Geneva in 2012, while Israeli tax authorities were pursuing an investigation that ultimately determined that he evaded $1.1 billion in taxes.

“Beny Steinmetz is a Swiss resident, pays taxes in strict accordance with his agreement with the Swiss tax authorities and has always managed his bank accounts in Switzerland in full compliance with all applicable laws and regulations,” Crutcher said.

A Pentler Pacific Ltd. appears in the HSBC files. Though it is not connected by HSBC to the Steinmetz group, Pentler Pacific is listed having the same address in the British Virgin Islands as Pentler Holdings, the Steinmetz vehicle that the FBI says bribed Touré. 

How the system works 

Digging for diamondsWomen in Zimbabwe digging for diamonds. Photo: APBanks like HSBC, as well as the offshore-front industry, are part of an infrastructure that enables the looting of poor countries and the evasion of taxes in rich countries.

“By and large really significant corruption in the resources sector does not involve suitcases of cash,” said Scott Horton, a lecturer at Columbia Law School who investigated the Simandou concessions for the new Guinean government and who wasn’t speaking specifically about Steinmetz. “It involves millions of dollars being paid into bank accounts. They may be in Geneva or London or New York. They may be held in the British Virgin Islands or the Caymans. Very, very rarely are they moving money into banks in Guinea or Liberia or Sierra Leone. You cannot pull off this large scale corruption without involving lawyers, accountants, investment advisers in places like Geneva, London, Amsterdam, New York and Paris.”

And Antwerp.

In September 2005, a diamond dealer from war-torn Central African Republic (CAR), one of the poorest countries on Earth, bumped into his new HSBC banker at the Park Lane hotel in Antwerp. Abdoul-Karim Dan Azoumi “was with the minister and the Central African delegations in the hall [or lobby],” noted his banker, and the two exchanged contact information in order to talk later. 

Dan-Azoumi’s papers weren’t in order with the bank for an unspecified reason, and the banker told him in phone calls over the next few weeks that he “wasn’t comfortable with the current situation,” and that forming an offshore company would solve the issue.

The banker noted that Dan-Azoumi was Muslim and had 18 children by four wives, two of whom he was still married to, and that he directed Badica, a diamond company based in the CAR. Badica would later be fingered by a United Nations Security Council committee for trafficking in blood diamonds.  The U.S. State Department noted reports that Badica had financed the Séléka, the Muslim rebel group that overthrew the predominantly Christian CAR government in 2013, setting off a civil war.

The Park Lane hotel itself was co-owned by four of the bank’s clients, including Luscha Baumwald, Louis Stranders, and Josif Grosz. “A family member has court concerns, so we wait to contact,” HSBC noted on Stranders’ account.

Mozes Victor Konig, one of the men now wanted by Interpol, was the fourth co-owner of the Park Lane. Konig had as much as $114 million in his HSBC accounts, one of which was called Front Trading Consultants Inc., during 2006/2007.  

The group had used the hotel investment to launder tens of millions in dirty money. All four would be convicted of fraud in 2012. A criminal court in Antwerp forced them to forfeit the $40 million hotel and another $18 million in cash and handed out sentences that ranged from probation to two years in prison.

https://www.icij.org/project/swiss-leaks/diamond-dealers-deep-trouble-bank-documents-shine-light-secret-ways

 

More Huberfeld and Optionable Inc. – A PIECE OF PLATINUM ANYONE?

 

MURRAY HUBERFELD, MARK NORDLICHT AND OBTIONABLE….

Thanks to our contributor on this one. – LM

Murray Huberfeld grew up in the Bronx and growing up became accustomed to selling off bogus and fraudulent deals. He never grew out of the habit, evidenced by relentlessly ongoing activities in private sector and public market activities. Every case or situation in which he continues to remain unscathed represents an unfortunate continuation of the status quo. He is a link to the Rothstein scandal. I wonder what that’s a link to. Arnold Rothstein?
Optionable Inc, the brokerage located in Valhalla, New York, transacts in the brokerage of
energy derivatives to brokerage and financial services firms globally. On January 22, 2007, NYMEX Holdings, parent to the New York Mercantile Exchange, issued a news release that the they were purchasing a 19% stake in the pink sheet Optionable Inc (OTC:OPBL). While the purchase may be questionable in and of itself, the history of those involved and one particular person tend to stand out.

NYMEX Chairman R. Schaeffer’s announcement of a 19% stake in Optionable, which increased revenues to $16 million from under $6 million. Such was reflected in Optionable’s stock price. But behind the commodity derivative brokerage’s arguably manufactured numbers exists a clinging reliance on related party transactions and often depends on one sole supplier or customer. Such parties include Capital Energy Services, a firm with a President and CEO accounting for a significant interest in Optionable’s revenue last year.

The Bank of Montreal must come as no surprise. According to Optionable filings, this bank accounted for a comparable amount of the Company’s revenues. Optionable received an advantage from this practice, achieving almost 80% margins when otherwise comparing to 56% with nonrelated parties.

David Lee, Bank of Montreal Commodity Trader, accounted for 18% of Optionable’s revenue. Mark Nordlicht founded Optionable Inc in 2000 with the backing of his like-minded morally challenged father, Jules Nordlicht, who had been federally prosecuted for manipulating the oil markets and withholding $27 million in illegal profits.

According to an April 2017 New York Post Article by Roddy Boyd, Jules owns 2.19 million shares.
635 Beach 19th Street
Far Rockaway, NY 11691
contact@optionable.com
Source: OTC Markets
NY Post: Roddy Boyd

Jona Rechnitz: Loan Shark? Diamond Dealer? Lucky Gambler? Real Estate Mogul? Shoshana by any other name…

 

jona rechnitz_crop_exact

NYPost: http://nypost.com/2017/04/26/key-witness-in-nypd-corruption-probe-was-an-alleged-loan-shark/

Key witness in NYPD corruption probe was an alleged ‘loan shark’’

The government’s key witness in multiple corruption probes was a part-time “loan shark” who made money doling out predatory loans, court documents alleged on Tuesday.

Jona Rechnitz — the government’s witness against two NYPD cops accused of taking bribes — “was nothing more than a loan shark” when it came to his business dealings with Hamlet Peralta, the former owner of a Harlem eatery that was popular with cops, Peralta’s lawyer said.

Peralta, the former owner of the Hudson River Cafe, stands accused of running a $12 million Ponzi scheme tied to an allegedly fictitious wholesale liquor business.

Peralta’s lawyer, Cesar de Castro, made the allegations against Rechnitz as part of a legal tug-of-war with feds about what evidence can be introduced at Peralta’s upcoming May trial.

The government wants to call as witnesses victims of Peralta’s alleged scheme who were recruited by Rechnitz — and who learned of the scheme through Rechnitz.

De Castro has objected, arguing that statements made by Rechnitz cannot be offered as the truth because he was engaged in his own loan-sharking scheme.

“Evidence at trial will show that (Rechnitz) was not Mr. Peralta’s agent but the architect of his own scheme in order to bleed Mr. Peralta dry,” de Castro said.

Rechnitz’s lawyer, Alan Levine, declined to comment.

Rechnitz, a real estate investor, is also the government’s key witness in the upcoming bribery trial of Norman Seabrook, former head of NYC’s correction officers’ union.

 

http://nypost.com/2017/04/26/key-witness-in-nypd-corruption-probe-was-an-alleged-loan-shark/

Jason Greenblatt and Berel Lazar – More Fake News?

Trump Team’s Links to Russia Crisscross in Washington

 

WASHINGTON — During the 2016 campaign, Donald J. Trump’s second campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, had regular communications with his longtime associate — a former Russian military translator in Kiev who has been investigated in Ukraine on suspicion of being a Russian intelligence agent.

At the Republican National Convention in July, J. D. Gordon, a former Pentagon official on Mr. Trump’s national security team, met with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, at a time when Mr. Gordon was helping keep hawkish language on Russia’s conflict with Ukraine out of the party’s platform.

And Jason Greenblatt, a former Trump Organization lawyer and now a special representative for international negotiations at the White House, met last summer with Rabbi Berel Lazar, the chief rabbi of Russia and an ally of Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin.

In a Washington atmosphere supercharged by the finding of the intelligence agencies that Mr. Putin tried to steer the election to Mr. Trump, as well as continuing F.B.I. and congressional investigations, a growing list of Russian contacts with Mr. Trump’s associates is getting intense and skeptical scrutiny.

Democrats see suspicious connections and inaccurate denials as part of a pattern that belies Mr. Trump’s adamant insistence that he and his associates “have nothing to do with Russia.” The president’s supporters say innocuous encounters, routine for any incoming presidential team, are being treated for political reasons as somehow subversive.

Mr. Trump denounced the furor over Russian connections on Thursday as a “total witch hunt” — but it may not have helped his case that the Russian foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, echoed his words on Friday, saying, “This all looks like a witch hunt.”

On Friday, Mr. Trump posted a picture on Twitter of a meeting between Mr. Putin and Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, and wrote that “we should start an immediate investigation into @SenSchumer and his ties to Russia and Putin.”

The issue has already had momentous consequences for the new administration. Michael T. Flynn lasted less than a month as national security adviser before being forced out for mischaracterizing his conversations with Mr. Kislyak. This week, Attorney General Jeff Sessions admitted to having meetings with Mr. Kislyak that he had not disclosed during his confirmation hearing.

Mr. Sessions fended off demands that he resign but agreed to recuse himself from what may be the most important investigation his Justice Department is conducting: of Russian meddling in the election and whether any of Mr. Trump’s associates colluded in those efforts. And that did not end the issue; all nine Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee called on Friday for Mr. Sessions to testify about his inaccurate denials that he had met with Russian officials during the campaign.

Part of the problem underlying disputes over such contacts may be Mr. Trump’s pugnacious style, which usually leaves little room for nuance. At a news conference last month, he said that he had “nothing to do with Russia,” and that “to the best of my knowledge, no person that I deal with does.”

In fact, vigorous reporting by multiple news media organizations is turning up multiple contacts between Trump associates and Russians who serve in or are close to Mr. Putin’s government. There have been courtesy calls, policy discussions and business contacts, though nothing has emerged publicly indicating anything more sinister. A dossier of allegations on Trump-Russia contacts, compiled by a former British intelligence agent for Mr. Trump’s political opponents, includes unproven claims that his aides collaborated in Russia’s hacking of Democratic targets.

To read the remainder of the article click, here.

NORM… – If You Were Going to Defraud Your Fellow Officers – You Needed to Learn the Ropes!!!

seabrook.2

Ex-correction union boss Norman Seabrook wasn’t properly supervised and showered execs with ‘luxury gifts,’ suit says

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/norman-seabrook-showered-execs-luxury-gifts-suit-article-1.2852569

Correction union execs weren’t keeping an eye on now-indicted ex-president Norman Seabrook when he invested pension money in a “Ponzi scheme” – because he had long showered them with gifts such as cars, a new lawsuit alleges.

The feds have alleged Murray Huberfeld, who ran an investment firm called Platinum Partners, agreed to give Seabrook a kickback in late 2013 — so he would invest union money in one of its high-risk funds.

Seabrook dumped some $20 million of Correction Officers’ Benevolent Association money into Platinum Partners in 2014.

That December, Seabrook received a $60,000 cash kickback in an $800 Ferragamo bag and became “angry,” griping it wasn’t enough, Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara has alleged.

Hedge fund holding Seabrook’s investment files for bankruptcy

Sources previously told the Daily News that the middleman who delivered the money to Seabrook was Jona Rechnitz, a major donor to de Blasio’s mayoral bid and the now-shuttered Campaign for One New York.

Platinum Partners has since declared bankruptcy, however – making COBA’s investments in the fund “virtually worthless,” according to the Manhattan federal court lawsuit, filed by Jeffrey Norton, of Newman Ferrara, and Philip Seelig. Seelig was COBA president from 1979 to 1992.

Seabrook got away with investing in Platinum — without COBA’s executive board knowing or approving the investment — because execs “had, for years, failed to supervise Seabrook in any meaningful way,” the suit charges.

“Indeed, Seabrook had ensured the Executive Board’s quiescence through liberal dispensations of gift cards, cars, and plush job assignments away from Rikers Island, which ensured they exercised no due diligence over Seabrook’s activities,” court papers say.

Indicted former NYC correction union boss wants Disney vacation

The suit also slams COBA’s law firm, Koehler & Isaacs LLP, as being “more loyal to Seabrook than to COBA” — and distracting union leadership — to protect its business interests.

“Although Koehler & Isaacs knew that Seabrook had made the high stakes investment, its contract with COBA could be imperiled if Koehler & Isaacs made any representations that called into question Seabrook’s activities,” court papers say.

The feds have alleged Murray Huberfeld agreed to give Seabrook a kickback in late 2013.

The feds have alleged Murray Huberfeld agreed to give Seabrook a kickback in late 2013.

(Jefferson Siegel/New York Daily News)

“Accordingly, Koehler & Isaacs neither advised nor warned the Executive Board about the investment.

“Instead, Koehler & Isaacs helped Seabrook co-opt the Executive Board by providing the members with GPS devices and other luxury gifts,” the suit says.

Seabrook loudly pleads not guilty to corruption charges

COBA President Elias Husamudeen said in a statement to The News that the filing is “yet another frivolous suit” brought by those who have an axe to grind with the union.

“The fact of the matter is that no matter how many lawsuits are brought against our union, we remain focused on representing and fighting for our members, 24 hours a day, seven days a week,” Husamudeen said.

Koehler & Isaacs also shot back at the suit, calling the allegations “salacious” and misleading.

“The facts will show that Koehler & Isaacs, along with COBA’s financial advisors, performed a thorough and diligent vetting of the union’s investment in Platinum Partners, which at the time of the investment, produced among the highest returns for investors in the hedge fund industry,” the firm said in a statement.

A new dimension to Seabrook corruption scandal?

To read the remainder of the article click here.

The Missing Trust Agreement, The Rabbi and the Diamond Dealer

Rabbi Berel Lazar and A Missing Trust Agreement Between Arkady Gaydamak and Lev Leviev

September 11, 2016/1 Comment/in Joe Levin /by Joe Levin

By this interview Rabbi Berel Lazar actually recognizes that he had received the envelope from Arkady Gaydamak or from Lev Leviev but by no means ever knew what this envelope contained.

As the Justice Lord Vos stated in his Decision, “since this TV interview Lazar (and Leviev) are not able to deny the fact that Lazar received for the safekeeping an envelope and thus each Party, Arkady Gaydamak and Leviev, should explain the content of the envelope”.

Thus, in front of the High Court of Justice, Rabbi Berel Lazar and other witnesses on Leviev’s side stated with great confidence that the envelope contained Gaydamak’s written commitments to contribute to the Federation of Jewish Organizations of FSU instead of, as Gaydamak stated, the copy of the signed Trust Agreement of December 13, 2001.

Leviev’s side even presented to the Court false, fabricated by the US Chartered Accountant Joel Zuller, Tax Return Forms, in order to support Leviev’s fraudulent allegations that Gaydamak had fulfilled his financial commitments of contribution to the Federation of Jewish Organizations.

The TV interview of Rabbi Berel Lazar evidenced premeditated, knowingly fraudulent statements and documents presented to the High Court of Justice in London by Lev Leviev and his accomplices.

Lazar’s affirmations are — that he did not know what the envelope contains; and that he had never understood the reason why he received the envelope; and he expressed his astonishment why Gaydamak did not keep with him one signed copy of such, in accordance with Gaydamak’s claim, an important document.

These kind of allegations, specifically expressed by Lazar, who pretends to be a Rabbi, are absolutely outrageous.

By his affirmations, Lazar rejects the basic Halachic Rule about the function of “Shomer Ne’eman” (safe-keeper or Jewish Notary, Trustee in duty).

In accordance with these rules, two Jews, in the case where they want to establish an important (from their point of view) confidential document– they should do it precisely in one signed copy and transmit it to a “Shomer Ne’eman” (for which any Rabbi can serve).

Only on condition when the document itself was established in accordance with the “Halacha” rules and “Mazal Ubraha” was pronounced, which is precisely the case, as the Justice Lord Vos has stated — the responsibility of “Shomer Ne’eman”, in this case Lazar, should be engaged.

In the case where “Shomer Ne’eman” (Lazar) is not able to return the document, specifically when the document did not disappear for the reason of Force Major (fire, flood, earthquake, and other kinds of “Plagues of Egypt”, etc.) and in the case of a dispute between the two parties that signed the document the Halacha says that the version of the complaining party (Gaydamak) should be accepted.

In this case, we have all the founded evidences at our disposal that Lazar had actually allowed this document to disappear intentionally for the reason of his acquaintance, connections with and dependence from Leviev (the Justice Lord Vos unambiguously stated it in his Decision of June 29, 2012).

Journalist:
Honorable Rabbi, Hello.

Rabbi Berel Lazar:
I will tell you what I told him. I told him a very simple thing. If you give me a paper… First thing, if you make an agreement with someone, it is very strange that you don’t keep a copy yourself.

It is a strange thing in my opinion. Second, if you give me such a paper, tell me what this paper is.

Of course I have never said to him that I kept it.

These are things that suddenly he thought that he had heard from me.

I had already said to him in a meeting: when did I tell you that?

He does not remember when I told him.

He does not remember if I told him. Maybe I did not tell him. And suddenly, afterwards, he decided that maybe there is a chance that he publishes that I was indeed heard nearby.

These are all, excuse me, fantasies of a person – that once he delivered to me a paper, in this paper something was written, something that he, himself, claims that he had not told me.

He does not remember when he delivered it to me, he does not remember who delivered it to me, but there is “as if”…

Journalist:
Do you remember that you received such a thing at all?

Rabbi Berel Lazar:
I do remember that once there was – that either HE or Leviev – gave me an envelope and that’s it. They did not even tell me to keep it.

Journalist:
Honestly, it does not make sense that a Rabbi who receives an envelope from Leviev or Gaydamak loses it, also in the case where he does not know what it contains.
Rabbi Lazar alleged in front of us that during his conversation with Leviev, the latter admitted in delivery of the envelope.

Leviev Assets Obtained by Fraud? Our Position all Along…

Lev Leviev Invested In U.S. Real Estate Assets Obtained By Fraud

http://www.totpi.com/31186-2/

On June 29, 2012, the High Court of Justice in London issued a Decision concerning the civil claim filed to the Court by Arkady Gaydamak in order to induce Lev Leviev to fulfil Leviev’s trust obligations towards Gaydamak in accordance with the Trust Agreement signed on December 13, 2001 and given for safekeeping to the so-called Chief Rabbi of Russia Berel Lazar.

Despite the fraudulent denial of Lev Leviev who stated in the Court that the Trust Agreement of December 13, 2001 never existed, and despite Rabbi Berel Lazar knowingly fraudulent statements that he never received the signed copy of the Trust Agreement for safekeeping, the Court, after detailed examination of the facts, issued his Decision:

Ҥ 257. For the reasons I [Justice Vos] have given, I find that the 2001 Agreement was indeed signed by Mr Gaydamak and Mr Leviev, and was a valid and enforceable agreement.

But, the parties entered into a valid and binding Settlement Agreement which took effect on 6th August 2011, whereby each party released all claims against the other.”

While the Court unambiguously stated that Leviev, Rabbi Berel Lazar and all witnesses from Leviev’s side lied to the court and presented to the Court fabricated documents in order to deny the existence of the Trust Agreement, Justice Vos “surprisingly” recognized the validity of 3-pages Settlement Agreement that was signed by Arkady Gaydamak and Lev Leviev.

In the course of the hearings, the Court recognized the following facts:

* The text of the Settlement Agreement was exclusively prepared by Leviev’s London lawyers and then remitted by Leviev to General Kopelipa,

* Arkady Gaydamak was never informed and was never acquainted with the content of the Settlement Agreement,

* The Settlement Agreement was signed in the middle of the night in the Luanda (Angola) hotel room of Gaydamak where to General Kopelipa went himself,

* Arkady Gaydamak never saw Leviev to sign, on his side, the Settlement Agreement,

* The individual who requested and induced Gaydamak to sign the Settlement Agreement with not a single amendment from Gaydamak’s side is the State Minister of Angolan Government, General Kopelipa, in charge of secret services and police,

* The General Kopelipa and Leviev are business partners in multibillion dollar transactions in the frame of the companies known as “China-Sonangol”, “88 Queensway Group”, etc., where are also involved Messrs Sam Pa, Pierre Falcone, Manuel Vicente,

The General Kopelipa unambiguously “made understand” that, if Gaydamak will not sign the Settlement Agreement, Gaydamak will never leave Angola.

While Justice Vos doesn’t argue with all those facts related to the circumstances of the signature of the Settlement Agreement, and found them cogent, and even stated in § 222 of his Decision: “… Had Mr Gaydamak persisted in arguing with General Kopelipa that the Settlement Agreement was not binding, I find it inconceivable that the General would have allowed Mr. Gaydamak to take his new passport and leave the country.

After all, it was General Kopelipa who seems to have invested the most effort to see that the Settlement Agreement was concluded.”

It is obvious that the signature of Arkady Gaydamak on the Settlement Agreement of August 6, 2011, was extorted under the threat to life. Gaydamak was induced under the threat to life by the close business associate of Leviev, General Kopelipa, to sign the Settlement Agreement.

By the UK and also the US trust legislation, the Trustee (Leviev) in no circumstances is able to become an owner of the Beneficiary’s (Gaydamak) assets.

The Trustee can dispose of the assets of the Beneficiary only by paying to the Beneficiary for his assets the adequate value. Only then the trust relationship can be terminated.

Thus, the Decision of Justice Lord Vos of June 29, 2012, confirms the existence and validity of the Trust Agreement of December 13, 2001.

Nevertheless, in order to favorite Lev Leviev, and because the Trust Agreement between Leviev and Gaydamak cannot be cancelled with respect to the law, the Justice Lord Vos made a “surprising” decision by confirming the validity of the Settlement Agreement. In accordance with the Settlement Agreement of August 6, 2011, Gaydamak, in exchange for nothing, simply authorizes Leviev to keep under his control Gaydamak’s assets created in the frame of the trust relationship.

(It should be noted that the multibillion dollar businesses of Leviev related to the Angolan entities initially were financed exclusively by Gaydamak).

Currently, it became obvious that Leviev invested in the US assets related to the Angolan entities, i.e. assets under the Trust Agreement between Leviev and Gaydamak.

These assets are related and managed exclusively by Leviev without any awareness of Gaydamak. Leviev and his accomplices in the frame of the activity of the companies “China-Sonangol”, “China Investment Fund”, “88 Queensway Group” unambiguously:

* Embezzled Angolan state assets

* Invested those assets particularly in the US without declaring to the authorities the real origin of the invested funds

* Invested, inter alia, in the US, the assets belonging to Gaydamak in accordance with the Trust Agreement and embezzled by Leviev

* The real estate transactions in the US were made by Leviev through the public companies with the obvious breach of “self-dealing regulations” (The former CEO of “Africa-Israel USA” filed a claim against Leviev in the US Court for the breach of “self-dealing regulations” and thus was fired.

 

To continue reading click here.