The victim in the "Invest Sochi" case complained about the investigation's delays.

The Prosecutor General's Office and the Investigative Committee have not made a procedural decision for a year regarding the complaint of the victim in the case of the embezzlement of 6.5 billion rubles from the shareholders in Sochi, Ekaterina Abramova. An employee of the Krasnodar prosecutor's office even blocked Abramova on WhatsApp*.

As reported by "Caucasian Knot", Muscovite Ekaterina Abramova was recognized as a victim in the housing fraud case in Sochi only five years after her first appeals to law enforcement agencies.

On July 18, 2025, Ekaterina Abramova submitted a crime report to the Prosecutor General's Office regarding the signs of organizing a criminal community (Article 210 of the Criminal Code of Russia). Over the next year, she sent several more complaints about the delays in Sochi and the Krasnodar region. Instead of procedural decisions, Senior Prosecutor of the Citizen Reception Department Stanislav Sosnovsky sent her notifications about the forwarding of documents back to the region, according to documents available to "Caucasian Knot".

"All appeals are signed by one person - Prosecutor Sosnovsky, who is well aware of the ongoing almost year-long non-consideration of the complaints... After December 2025, during personal receptions, he stated that he had no access to the database, only the Prosecutor General has access. I request a written explanation of why, almost a year after the report of particularly serious crimes, I have not received either a decision to initiate or to refuse to initiate a criminal case, but only notifications about forwarding," Abramova wrote in a complaint to Prosecutor General Alexander Gutsan. She did not receive answers to her questions for an entire year.

Promise of video communication and blocking on WhatsApp*

After Abramova's visit to the Prosecutor General's Office on August 6, Sosnovsky promised that either Assistant Prosecutor of the Krasnodar Territory Oksana Penzina or a representative of the regional prosecutor's office, Elisei Platonov, would contact her to organize a video conference regarding the inaction of Sochi law enforcement.

Platonov called Abramova the same day and promised to send procedural decisions from the regional prosecutor's office via WhatsApp*, according to an audio recording of the conversation (available to the editorial office). The documents were not sent, after which Abramova's number was blocked.

Today, August 7, Abramova came to see Sosnovsky and reported the blocking. "They are currently having a collegium there, right up to the last moment, until about six o'clock. They are sitting under the spotlights, and not only is it difficult to pick up the phone - it's hard to even whisper to each other (...) As an exception, I will call you after the call with Platonov," she conveyed the prosecutor's words.

At the same time, he directed the applicant to the reception of the Investigative Committee on Frunzenskaya Embankment, where, according to him, her complaints under Article 210 of the Criminal Code of Russia had been forwarded. Abramova applied to the Investigative Committee the same day.

"There, I was told that all my complaints had been sent back to the Prosecutor General's Office. The circle suddenly closed completely," she told a correspondent of "Caucasian Knot" after speaking with an unnamed agency employee.

Documents and conversation records indicate the route of the appeals: the Prosecutor General's Office sent them to the prosecutor's office of the Krasnodar Territory, from there - to the prosecutor's office of the Central District of Sochi, then - to the investigative department of the Sochi Internal Affairs Directorate to investigator Kristina Skonchibasova, who archived the case.

Responses from supervisory authorities

"Caucasian Knot" studied the responses received by Abramova after complaints about the actions of the prosecutors. In a response dated July 8, 2026, signed by the head of the department Tsitsilina, the Prosecutor General's Office reported that "copies of the complaint were sent to the prosecutors of Moscow and Krasnodar Territory." The complaint about Sosnovsky's actions was not considered.

The Krasnodar Territory Prosecutor's Office, in a response dated July 13, 2026, signed by the head of the department Mikhailenko, forwarded the appeal to the prosecutor of the Central District of Sochi, Savenkov. "That is, the complaint against the employee of the Prosecutor General's Office must be considered by the lowest prosecutor in the hierarchy, which is absurd," Abramova noted.

The military prosecutor's office of the Sochi garrison, in a response dated July 15, 2026, signed by prosecutor Basik, outlined the chronology of correspondence and confirmed that materials from 2022-2025 were sent to the investigative department of the Sochi Internal Affairs Directorate to investigator Skonchibasova. No assessments of the inaction of the investigation and supervision were provided in the response.

Assessment by the lawyer

The entire prosecutorial vertical violated the provisions of Federal Law No. 59-FZ, which prohibits sending a complaint to the authority or official whose actions are being challenged, noted lawyer Sergey Sivkov, who previously worked in the prosecutor's office.

"By sending Abramova's complaints about the inaction of Sochi prosecutors and investigators back to the district prosecutor Savenkov and investigator Skonchibasova, regional and federal prosecutors are committing direct procedural forgery," Sivkov told a correspondent of "Caucasian Knot".

He called the second violation the substitution of the Criminal Procedure Code with the law on citizens' appeals. "Reports of a committed crime under Article 210 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation must be considered strictly in accordance with Articles 144-145 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation within a period of three to 30 days with the issuance of a mandatory procedural document - a decision to initiate a criminal case or to refuse, which the applicant has the right to appeal. But Abramova has nothing to appeal because the prosecutor's office registered her complaints not as reports of a crime, but as ordinary citizens' appeals, depriving her of the right as a victim in the criminal process to procedural appeal," said the lawyer.

The third violation he noted was the ignoring of supervisory powers. "The statements of prosecutors that they have no access to the databases of the Ministry of Internal Affairs or that they do not search for investigators are deliberate deception. The prosecutor has full authority to demand the materials of the investigation, cancel illegal decisions, and send materials to the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation to initiate cases under Article 293 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation against investigators concealing crimes," Sivkov stated.

According to him, such violations have become the norm for the law enforcement system, which has focused mainly on politically motivated cases since the start of the military operation in Ukraine.

Lawyer's advice to victims

Sivkov recommended that shareholders facing delays move to the judicial plane. "All inactions and the absence of responses to reports of crimes must be appealed in court under Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. All oral visits and conversations should be stopped and documented. A complaint should be filed in the district court at the location of the authority that issued the response, regarding the inaction of the prosecutor's office, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation. The judicial procedure under Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation obliges law enforcement to provide the court with all criminal cases and KUSP, where the victim can familiarize themselves with them," he said.

He also advises sending a request to the investigator and prosecutor based on Article 42 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Russia, demanding to provide case materials for copying, and to appeal any refusals in court.

"If there are many victims, then cooperate. Submit a collective report of a crime under Article 210 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation directly through the Information Center of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation addressed to Bastrykin. In cases of social vulnerability and significant damage, the central office of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation regularly seizes materials from unscrupulous regional departments," Sivkov added. He also recommends filing complaints for holding officials accountable under Article 293 of the Criminal Code of Russia for negligence.

Comments from Sosnovsky, Platonov, and other mentioned prosecutors regarding the circumstances outlined by Abramova are not yet available to "Caucasian Knot".