The Moscow region’s Klinsky district once led by Alexander Postrigan has been the focus of a high-profile legal saga. A court has handed down an 18-year sentence in a maximum-security colony to the former district head, after prosecutors accused him of orchestrating a criminal group. The verdict comes amid intense courtroom coverage reported by REN TV, with details provided by a courtroom correspondent present for the proceedings.
Earlier, the state prosecutor’s office had asked the court to impose a 22-year term. The escalation in the requested punishment reflected the gravity of the allegations and the evidence presented during the trial, though the final judgment diverged by eight years in duration. The case underscores the seriousness with which authorities treat allegations of organized crime and the abuse of official power at local government levels.
During the investigation, security agencies in June 2019 uncovered assets linked to the former official totaling nearly 9 billion rubles. Concurrently, the Office of the Attorney General filed a civil suit to seize property valued around 4 billion rubles. As the case progressed, the claim amount was revisited in light of new findings showing that Postrigan actively participated in a business matter connected to his son. This development prompted a revised assessment of the financial stakes tied to the alleged crimes and the broader implications for his family’s commercial interests, as disclosed by the authorities involved in the case.
The allegations against Alexander Postrigan extended to a sequence of fraudulent acts estimated at tens of millions of rubles, including a series of frauds totaling 43 million rubles. The prosecution contended that these acts were carried out with deliberate intent and within a framework of corrupt practices that leveraged his official position for personal gain, though the defense subsequently argued about the interpretation of certain transactions and the applicable legal standards.
By all accounts, the trial also touched on prior investigative steps, such as preliminary questioning of key political figures associated with open government initiatives. In particular, there was public interest in the questioning of Mikhail Abyzov, a former minister associated with governance reforms. The proceedings connected to Abyzov’s testimony contributed to the overall narrative surrounding governance, accountability, and the enforcement of anti-corruption measures in the country’s administrative machinery.
As the legal process unfolded, observers noted the broader implications for regional leadership and the ongoing fight against corruption within municipal administrations. The outcome, including the sentence and the accompanying civil actions, reflects the judiciary’s handling of complex cases that intertwine governance, business interests, and criminal conduct. The case remains a point of reference for discussions about oversight, transparency, and the mechanisms used to recover misappropriated assets in the wake of serious charges.