Former Russian minister jailed for UK sanctions breaches
Dmitrii Ovsiannikov, once the governor of Sevastopol, was convicted of having tens of thousands of pounds transferred into his newly opened Halifax Bank of Scotland (HBOS) account by his wife, when he knew he was prohibited from doing so.
Under the original asset freeze Ovsiannikov was not allowed to spend money even on basic necessities, and others were not permitted to assist him to do so.
The case is the first prosecution in the UK regarding a breach of sanctions under the Russia Regulations 2019.
These were imposed after the European Union sanctions ceased to have an effect in the UK post-Brexit.
Ovsiannikov was found guilty at London's Southwark Crown Court on Wednesday of six out of seven counts of circumventing sanctions between February 2023 and January 2024.
He was sentenced at the same court on Friday to 40 months' imprisonment for each count to be served concurrently.
The total amount of time Ovsiannikov will serve was reduced by the 217 days he has spent on curfew, and he will spend up to half of his sentence in custody before he is released on licence.
His brother Alexei Owsjanikow, 47, was sentenced to 15 months in prison suspended for the same amount of time after being convicted of two counts of circumventing sanctions by paying school fees of £41,027 ($53,700) for his sibling's children.
Ovsiannikov's wife Ekaterina Ovsiannikova was cleared of four countsof circumventing sanctions by assisting with payments totalling £76,000 into her husband's Halifax account in February 2023.
She sent him £1,000 and then a further three instalments of £25,000.
Ovsiannikov waved to her after the sentence was handed out and she waved back and smiled.
Ahead of sentencing, Rosemary Davidson, defending Ovsiannikov, told the judge that the entire family including the older children has been "de-banked" again after the press reported the conviction.
"It's going to be a feature of their lives going forward", she said,adding that Dmitrii "has to live" with the fact this has significantly impacted "those nearest and dear to him".
"That is also part of the consequences that he has to bear and continues to bear", she said.
Sentencing the two men, Mrs Justice Cockerill said the "weight given" to the fact that the Russia-Ukraine war is ongoing "had to be fairly limited".
She said their offending was on the "simple and candid end of the scale - a country mile from the kinds of structures seen in some fraud claims."
The funds were transferred by family members into the Halifax bank account in Ovsiannikov's name and "no attempt was made to disguise"the payments, the judge added.
The financial gain was "very limited indeed" and "each offence in the banking aspect related to no more than £25,000", she said.
Addressing Owsjanikow, Mrs Justice Cockerill said there was "a clear motivation" to support the children as they transitioned to life in the UK and that was "plainly in the hearts of all those involved in this case".
The offending was "well, rather than badly, intended in its dominant motive", she added.
Putin appointed Ovsiannikov as the governor of Sevastopol in Crimea on July 28, 2016 in a "high-profile political appointment", the court previously heard. He took up the role two years after Russia illegally annexed theregion from Ukraine. - dpa
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times of Oman
5 hours ago
- Times of Oman
"Fueling Putin's war machine": US Senators say penalise India, China, Brazil with 500% tarriff to deter trade with Russia
Washington DC [US]: Amid US President Donald Trump call for imposing 100 per cent "secondary tariffs" on Moscow if Russian President Vladimir Putin fails to end the conflict in Ukraine within 50 days, Senators Lindsey Graham and Richard Blumenthal have warned countries, including India, of economic sanctions if they continue business with Russia. South Carolina Republican Senator Graham and Democratic Senator Bluementhal are leading 85 cosponsors on a bipartisan bill they introduced in Congress earlier this year calling for implementing sanctions on Moscow, which they say could be a "sledgehammer" President Trump needs to end the conflict. "We'll continue to push for Senator Graham & my Russia Sanctions bill with even tougher penalties to deter India, China, Brazil & others from fueling Putin's war machine. Congressional action sends a powerful message of support," Richard Bluementhal said in a post on his social media handle X. As per a joint statement by Graham and Blumenthal, China, India, and Brazil and other nations "that prop up Putin's war machine" by purchasing "cheap Russian oil and gas", which that claim is fuelling Putin's effort in the conflict with Russia. It called for the imposition of tariffs as high as 500 per cent on any country that helps Russia. Trump announced "secondary tariffs" on Russia during his meeting with NATO General Secretary Mark Rutte on Monday (US local time). Democratic Senator Blumenthal, in a post, lauded the US President's decision, calling it a "breakthrough step" while slamming Putin by calling him a "thug". He further called for pushing the bill, "Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025", introduced by him and Senator Graham on April 1, noting that the bill will impose "tougher penalties to deter India, China, Brazil" and other countries that are still in business with Moscow. "The President's announcement is a breakthrough step--committing to both substantial military aid & strong sanctions. It recognizes the urgency of showing sledgehammer strength--because peace through strength is the only viable strategy with a thug like Putin," Blumenthal post on X read A joint statement by Graham and Blumenthal noted that Trump's announcement was a strong executive measure to push all parties toward negotiations with the true aim to compel Putin to engage in peace talks. "The ultimate hammer to bring about the end of this war will be tariffs against countries, like China, India and Brazil, that prop up Putin's war machine by purchasing cheap Russian oil and gas. President Trump's decision to announce the implementation of 100 percent secondary tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil and gas if a peace agreement is not reached in the next 50 days is a real executive hammer to drive the parties to the negotiating table. The goal is not more tariffs and sanctions - the goal is to entice Putin to come to the peace table," the statement read. "Finally, as President Trump indicated, we will join our colleagues in continuing to work with the White House on our bipartisan Russia sanctions legislation that would implement up to 500 percent tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil and gas and do not help Ukraine," it said. Trump, during his meeting with the NATO chief, stated that he was "very unhappy" with Russia and announced the imposition of the 100 per cent tariffs on Russia if a peace deal wasn't made within 50 days. "One of the reasons that you're here today is to hear that we are very unhappy - I am - with Russia. But we will discuss that maybe another day. But we're very, very unhappy with them, and we're going to be doing very severe tariffs if we don't have a deal in 50 days. Tariffs at about 100 percent. You'd call them secondary tariffs. But today, we're going to talk about something else," Trump had said. Earlier this month, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar stated that the Indian embassy and ambassador have been in touch with Senator Graham regarding the bill on Russia and that "India will have to cross that bridge if it comes to it." Addressing a press conference, Jaishankar had stated that India's concerns and interests on energy and security have been made conversant to Graham. When asked about US plans to impose a 500 per cent tariff on the import of Russian oil, Jaishankar said, "Regarding Senator Lindsey Graham's bill, any development which is happening in the US Congress is of interest to us if it impacts our interest or could impact our interest. So we have been in touch with Senator Lindsey Graham. The embassy, ambassador have been in touch. Our concerns and our interests on energy, security have been made conversant to him. So we'll then have to cross that bridge when we come to it. If we come to it."
Observer
18 hours ago
- Observer
Greek govt calls for EU farm scandal probe
ATHENS: The Greek government on Monday called for a special parliamentary committee to probe a European Union farm subsidies scandal, reportedly involving tens of millions of euros, that has seen at least two ministers put under EU investigation. Government spokesman Pavlos Marinakis said the ruling conservative party would request an investigation into the 27-year operation of the Greek authority for the payment of common agricultural policy aid (OPEKEPE). "Our proposal concerns the period from the establishment of OPEKEPE in 1998 until today in order to investigate the dysfunctions, identify the problems and ensure complete transparency," Marinakis told reporters. An investigation by EU prosecutors has shown widespread abuse of funds at OPEKEPE, which according to the government annually disburses 2.5 billion euros to nearly 650,000 farmers. Reports said prosecutors suspect tens of millions of euros have been siphoned off. The investigation period is mostly under the current government, which came to power in July 2019. But the government argues that the fraud has lasted decades. In nearly 30 years, the Greek state has paid more than 2.7 billion euros in fines, Marinakis said. — AFP
Observer
18 hours ago
- Observer
Britain and Europe are changing together
Many state visits are empty, symbolic acts that have little to no policy content or lasting significance. But every now and then, such a visit changes the shape of international relations. Could French President Emmanuel Macron's recently concluded trip to London be one of them? Macron's three-day trip, the first state visit to the United Kingdom by a European Union head of state since Brexit in 2020, had plenty of pomp and pageantry. But it also focused on policy and politics, which reflects a profound shift in the UK's circumstances since leaving the EU. During the upheaval of the Brexit psychodrama, there was little interest in constructive exchange, and the UK's relationship with Europe remained defined by its lurching departure from the bloc. But nearly a decade on, Donald Trump is back in the White House and has launched a trade war on the world. Russian President Vladimir Putin has shredded the European security order. And Chinese President Xi Jinping has resorted to threats of economic coercion – a striking reversal from the 'golden era' of UK-China relations proclaimed in 2015. Even more dramatic, perhaps, are the changes in the EU. The big policy initiatives launched during Macron's UK visit reflect the forces that are turning the bloc on its head. First, the EU is moving from a peace project to a war union. For most of its existence, the EU sought peace through economic integration. But Putin's war of Ukraine in 2022 reoriented the bloc towards security – a goal that has taken on greater urgency since Trump cast doubt on the United States' commitment to collective security on the continent. There is broad support for this new orientation. According to a recent opinion poll conducted by the European Council on Foreign Relations, many Europeans favour increased defence spending, conscription and the development of a European or national nuclear deterrent. Against this backdrop, Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer took a bold first step towards establishing an independent nuclear deterrent with the Northwood Declaration, in which they agreed that 'there is no extreme threat to Europe that would not prompt a response by our two nations.' A second major change is the development of 'securonomics.' The EU economy is under pressure from Trump's tariffs and China's export restrictions on magnets and critical minerals. EU policymakers now talk of de-risking, diversifying and deepening the single market, rather than pursuing free-trade agreements. While the UK has made it clear that it will not rejoin the single market or the customs union, the question is whether it can persuade the EU that it can be counted on to help the bloc achieve its new trade goals, or whether it will be given unfriendly treatment because it is seen as posing a risk to those objectives. Domestic politics in Europe has also undergone a rapid transformation. It has been fascinating to watch Macron – once a poster boy for liberal universalism – reinvent himself as a champion of secure borders and protectionism, while taking a tougher stance on crime. This volte-face has seen mainstream European politicians shift focus towards defending national sovereignty – from Russia, China, Trump, and migration – while they try to contain populist parties such as Marine Le Pen's National Rally and Alternative für Deutschland. That is the backdrop for the ground-breaking deal that Starmer and Macron signed on migration returns. Starmer's approach to Europe is a marked improvement from that of former Conservative prime ministers Boris Johnson (who compared the EU to Napoleon and Hitler) and Liz Truss (who questioned whether Macron was a friend or a foe). Starmer has proved himself, particularly with his deft diplomacy on Ukraine, to be a reliable partner and stakeholder, regaining the trust of EU institutions and member states. One senior German policymaker told me how impressed he was by the UK filling the leadership vacuum created by Trump's disregard for Ukraine. In other words, the UK is widely seen in Europe as being 'part of the team' again. The EU-UK summit in May provided a clear framework for deepening the relationship, not least through a Security and Defence Partnership that paves the way for British participation in European defence programmes. But the UK government has remained far too cautious in other areas. Most notably, Starmer has been careful not to cross the Labour Party's self-imposed red lines: no freedom of movement, no customs union and no single market. Future historians may well wonder why Starmer did not aim higher. The changing international environment offers Starmer a clear opportunity to redraw Europe's political map, which would establish him as one of Britain's most consequential leaders. But to do so, Starmer must convince British voters that today's Europe is a different creature from the one they imagine: a defence community that is more focused on safeguarding the continent than on transcending the nation-state. And he must explain how the UK can help build this new European security order, so long as it banishes the Brexit mindset. As a post-liberal Europe emerges, Britain must stop clinging to the past and seize the chance to shape the continent's future in a way that advances its interests. That requires acknowledging that both the EU and the UK have entered a new era. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2025
