Sofia City Court released TV producer Niko Tuparev from custody and did not impose any remand on him. He is accused of official embezzlement of extremely large amounts of money.
According to the judges, Niko Tuparev has no way to commit the crimes he is accused of, namely to embezzle BGN 1,400,000 from a company in which he was a partner.
The decision of the court can be appealed by the prosecutor's office. Today, Nikola Tuparev came out with a position on what happened.
The full text of the position:
„In connection with the events of the last days and months, in which my name was involved in muddy media events, institutional repression and subsequent detention, and subsequently release for lack of any evidence, I would like to clarify the facts and put a few the matter of public attention.
My holdup was reported as fact on undercover sites before it ever happened. In the same, for several months now, an aggressive slander campaign has been going on against me and my family.
The charge on which I was brought is for embezzlement by “Lyme” Ltd., in which I am a partner and own 85% of the shares, but I have never been a manager. De jure there is no way for me to be subject to the crime of “misappropriation”, since I am not an official for “Lyme”. “Lyme“ is a special purpose investment company focused on the real estate market. It does not develop and has never developed a production activity, had no relations with any of the televisions and generally has nothing to do with my business.
“Lime“ Ltd., together with “Cuba Libre“ Ltd. and “NJ Property“ Ltd., is the subject of numerous reports submitted by me to competent institutions, including the prosecutor's office and the GDBOP, in connection with the investigation of a possible criminal scheme, with the participation of the manager and minority partner in the companies - Alexander Toshev and a company committed to providing legal services to the business .
The aim of the multi-layered scheme is to control the companies and seize their assets. It includes fictitiously obtained and given loans by the manager of the companies from and to persons related to the manager, for the purposes of establishing enforcement proceedings against each company. During my opposition as a majority partner, false documents with a notary certification were entered in the Commercial Register, according to which I sell my shares in an absolutely identical way in all three companies for a price equal to their nominal value (5,000 BGN). All three share transfers are the subject of numerous civil and commercial cases, as evidenced by their entries in the Commercial Register. The last action taken by Alexander Toshev is precisely the fabrication of the report against me for embezzlement, regardless of the fact that it was Alexander Toshev who was the manager and charged with the duties of managing the accounts and property of “Lime” Ltd. It is on the basis of this signal that a prosecutor with a dubious reputation prepares an indictment that, according to the SGS, is unfounded from a legal point of view.
The dividends that I am accused of misappropriating were wired via electronic banking from the account of an employee of Alexander Toshev based on a power of attorney issued by Toshev himself. The dividends have been declared to the National Revenue Agency and are reflected in the annual financial report of “Lime” Ltd., signed by Toshev, with which he de facto validates the payments made as legitimate.
In any case, the payment of dividends could become a dispute of a civil nature, but it cannot constitute grounds for criminal prosecution against a partner who has received dividends paid to him by the manager. It is obvious, even on the basis of publicly available information, that the accusation is a targeted repression designed to remove me from these companies. Moreover, the permanent judicial practice is categorical that it is inadmissible to use the criminal process as a means of resolving disputes of a civil nature.
I remain convinced that the institutions, or at least some of their representatives, continue to act as clubs and serve criminal schemes. If this practice is not eradicated, any legal private business could be next. It's a patron's question.
Nikola Tuparev,
Producer