Lawyers for Stepanov and his company sought damages from OCCRP, arguing that the story implied that the firm was involved in organized crime. The court ruled that OCCRP accurately described Midland Consult’s role in registering companies that later were used or alleged to be used by organized crime to launder money.
“We feel gratified that the court comprehensively sided with OCCRP,” said OCCRP Editor Drew Sullivan. “They left no doubt that our story was not libelous.”
Stepanov and Midland Consult could try to get a higher court to review the case but Sullivan said he believed the definitive nature of the rulings made this unlikely to be successful.
Stepanov, Midland Consult and other affiliated parties also sued two OCCRP partners in Latvia and a partner in Russia. The registration agents also sued Barrons Magazine which cooperated on reporting with OCCRP. A New York appellate court has similarly ruled in favor of Barrons. So far, in eight separate rulings, all trial and appeals courts have ruled in favor of OCCRP and its partners.
“We see these suits as simple harassment of media for telling an inconvenient truth,” Sullivan said.
“It’s not comfortable for legitimate businesses to be named together with organized crime interests in the newspaper. People don’t like it. But there are company registration firms, lawyers, business intelligence firms and other people who we call the ‘criminal services industry’ who, knowingly or not, effectively cater to organized crime and corrupt politicians. We will continue to point this out because what they do enables criminality even if they do not intentionally participate in it,” Sullivan said.
