A Vladivostok court has handed down a serious bribery conviction against Damir Niyazov, a former employee of the Primorsky District Prosecutor’s Office. He was sentenced to eight years in prison and ordered to pay a 15 million ruble fine. The ruling was announced after officials published the case results on the Primorsky District Prosecutor’s Office Telegram channel, signaling the authorities’ intent to document and publicly disclose results of anti-corruption efforts.
The Leninsky District Court in Vladivostok found that between February and July 2021 two individuals acting as intermediaries engaged in a scheme to channel bribes linked to parole decisions. Their coordinated actions aimed to influence release conditions by funneling money through a network of contacts connected to the case, revealing a deliberate attempt to sway the outcomes of judicial and administrative procedures.
In July 2021, an intermediary who was previously a lawyer received 1.5 million rubles with the purpose of transferring funds to Niyazov. The plan stalled when the intermediary was detained, preventing the money from reaching the accused. This interruption formed a crucial piece of the court’s assessment, illustrating the scale of the bribery operation and its planned nature, and showing that the scheme depended on the flow of funds through multiple hands.
During the verdict, Niyazov was found guilty under Part 3 of Article 30 and Part 6 of Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for attempting to take a bribe on a large scale. The punishment reflects the gravity of official corruption and the impact such offenses have on the integrity of the public service system. Along with eight years of imprisonment, the court imposed a 15 million ruble fine, a five-year ban from civil service, and the forfeiture of the rank of judicial adviser, underscoring the message that high-ranking officials are not immune from consequences when their actions undermine legal procedures and public trust.
Earlier developments in the case indicated that another defendant had been detained in connection with a separate matter involving customs bribery. Together, these procedural steps point to a broader inquiry into corruption-related offenses within related administrative and judicial circles. The court’s decisions highlight ongoing government efforts to deter bribery and to reinforce the integrity of public service in the region, showing that authorities are pursuing a comprehensive approach to corruption cases and ensuring accountability for those who hold public office.
These actions reflect a broader policy intent to safeguard the fairness of parole processes and other critical decisions that affect citizen rights. By publicly detailing the charges, evidence, and penalties, the authorities aim to deter similar conduct in the future and to reassure the public that violations of trust within the criminal justice system are taken seriously. The case demonstrates how cooperation among investigators, prosecutors, and the judiciary can uncover and dismantle schemes designed to influence the course of justice, even when such schemes involve multiple intermediaries and complex financial maneuvers.