The military prosecutor Sergei Fridinsky sent a letter addressed to Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov, which states that one of the main contenders for the post of head of the military police has a canceled criminal record. A copy of this letter was in the hands of correspondents of the Kommersant newspaper, who shed light on its details.
In particular, it says that since November 2011, the head of the group for the creation of the governing bodies of the military police is Lieutenant-General Sergei Surovkin, who is also named one of the most promising candidates for the post of head of the main department of this department established under the Ministry of Defense. Fridinsky also paid special attention to the fact that sixteen years ago Surovkin received one year conditionally under the article 17, part 1 Art. 218 UK RSFSR, providing responsibility for assisting in the acquisition of firearms weaponswithout permission.
It happened in 1995, when at that time Major Surovkin was still studying at the Frunze Military Academy. According to representatives of the Military Investigation Department, at that time some of the teachers were prosecuted for the illegal sale of weapons. According to them, Major Surovkin, at the request of one of these teachers, whose name was not named, handed over to one of the officers, who was studying in another course, a pistol that was supposed to be used in competitions. During interrogation, Surovkin claimed that he was confident of the legality of his actions. After the investigation established that he was indeed framed, the charge was dropped and the previous conviction was canceled.
However, in his letter, Fridinsky referred to the law “On Police”, which states that persons with a canceled or removed conviction cannot hold police posts. Guided by this, as well as "moral and ethical considerations," he asked Minister Anatoly Serdyukov to "take into account what was stated" when deciding whether Surovkin was to be appointed head of the military police department.
However, a number of experts expressed the opinion that it was not only “moral and ethical considerations” that forced the military prosecutor to make this request to Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov.
The Kommersant newspaper received a message from a representative of the leadership of the Central Military Department, which stated that the prosecutor’s office was worried about the retention of its authority. And this letter is nothing more than an attempt to prevent the emergence of a possible competitor. The position of the military procurators is quite understandable, since it is not yet clear what spheres of influence each of the structures will receive. It is possible that part of the functions currently performed by the prosecution authorities will fall to the military police.
The same problem led to mutual dislike of the Prosecutor General's Office and the Investigative Committee, for which a clear division of powers was not indicated at the time. It may be noted one of the key points in the confrontation between the two departments, which received wide publicity. This investigation is conducted around a whole network of casinos operating illegally in the Moscow region. As a result of the investigation conducted by the Investigative Committee, among the defendants was the former head of the Moscow region prosecutor’s office Dmitry Urumov, the ex-prosecutors Vladimir Glebov, Oleg Bazlyan and Roman Nishimenko. Of particular note was the accusation of the TFR against the General Prosecutor’s Office in connection with the in absentia arrested former deputy prosecutor of the Moscow region Alexander Ignatenko. The Prosecutor General’s Office was accused of unwillingness to bring Alexander Ignatenko into Interpol’s base, which was an obstacle to organizing joint events with representatives of the foreign police for his international search.
A number of smaller scandals were noted. For example, the Investigation Committee opened a criminal case on the fact of the suicide of the prosecutor Vyacheslav Sizov. We can also recall the scandalous “attempt at rape” that the Prosecutor General’s Office officer made in relation to his secretary. This is not a complete list of the scandalous moments in the confrontation of the TFR and GP.
It is not yet clear whether to expect such a confrontation between the military prosecutor's office and the future military police, since the functions of the latter are not yet fully developed.
From the already announced functions of the new department, one can single out:
escorting military cargo, including in the framework of cooperation with other countries;
the implementation of the garrison guard;
management of the curfew service;
performing the role of a military traffic police.
Also at this time, the issue of including operational-search activity in the composition of the military police functions is being worked out. The plans were the introduction of the military police in the 2010 year, but due to various difficulties that arose in the process of its implementation, the process was “delayed”. Now, the launch date for the new department is 2012 year.