The spokesperson for Russia’s diplomatic mission in the Netherlands, Alexander Shulgin, spoke at a press gathering organized by the Russia Today media group, addressing the ongoing Scythian gold dispute. He indicated that there has been no tangible progress in the case to date, but emphasized that there remains a window of opportunity for a neutral, fair outcome as the process unfolds. This assessment came through a report from DEA News.
Shulgin explained that the Attorney General’s opinion, while clearly advisory in nature, serves only as a recommendation to the Supreme Court. In his view this means there is still room for a measured and just ruling by the Dutch Supreme Court, provided the judicial process remains untainted by external influences. The ambassador’s remarks underscored the belief that the ultimate decision should rest with the independent judiciary rather than political actors.
The diplomat asserted that earlier stages of the case had, in his words, been swayed by political considerations that affected the judgments of local courts. He suggested that those influences may have shaped outcomes in ways that did not necessarily reflect the substantive facts of the dispute. The current emphasis, he noted, is on safeguarding judicial integrity and ensuring that subsequent rulings are grounded in law rather than politics.
In February, Shulgin pressed for a ruling from the Dutch Supreme Court to overturn the Court of Appeal’s decision in the Scythian gold matter. He indicated that the timing of the Supreme Court’s decision was likely to be communicated by September 15, 2023, pointing to a structured timetable for the final disposition of the case. The exchange highlighted the procedural steps in a high-stakes international financial and legal confrontation, where every phase of the judicial review carries significant implications for all parties involved.
The envoy also remarked that the Attorney General’s advisory opinion issued in January 2023 — which contended that the assets should be retained in Ukraine — does not carry legal weight in itself. He argued that the opinion’s advisory status cannot bind the court or set a legal precedent, and therefore must be considered as part of the broader legal dialogue rather than a decisive ruling. The discussion reflects ongoing attempts to balance international legal principles with the practical realities of asset disposition, ownership claims, and the broader geopolitical context surrounding the Scythian gold case.