Pavlov Vladimir Vladimirovich

Pavlov Vladimir Vladimirovich

Biography

2024: Arrest - in contract embezzlement case for MoD

On August 1, 2024, the Meshchansky Court of Moscow detained Vladimir Pavlov, Director General of Voentorg JSC, in the case of embezzlement under contracts for the Russian Ministry of Defense. The preventive measure was chosen until September 30, 2024.

As reported by Sheets"," the criminal case under the article on fraud on an especially large scale was initiated by the Investigation Department MINISTRY OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS Russia on July 30, 2024. The next day, Pavlov was searched, after which he was charged.

According to the case file, in 2019, the leadership and employees of Voentorg colluded with accomplices in various regions of Russia, including Moscow, North Ossetia, Stavropol Territory and the Pskov Region. They entered into state contracts for the supply of Army Non-Nurses in the amount of ₽625 million.

The investigation claims that the accused purchased products from manufacturing companies through controlled organizations, the beneficiary of which was an entrepreneur from North Ossetia. Then the goods were sold by the Ministry of Defense at an inflated price. The total overstatement amounted to more than ₽400 million, which caused significant damage to the military department.

Vladimir Pavlov, who has been the general director of Voentorg for more than 12 years, does not admit his guilt. He said in court that he did not see any hints of his involvement in the crime in the case file. Pavlov's defense claims that he did not sign the contracts involved in the case.

Lawyers of the accused presented to the court his awards, including the medal of the Order of Merit to the Fatherland and gratitude from the president, as well as information about his participation in hostilities. However, these characteristics did not affect the court's decision.

The second person involved in the case was businessman Timur Isakov, whom the court also arrested until September 30, 2024. Isakov's defense claims that the purchase of army non-nurses was not carried out at inflated prices, and their cost was due to costs associated with a long production cycle and tight delivery times.^[1]

Notes