On 26 August lawyer Vadim Klyuvgant wrote a letter to Alexander Privalov of the Expert weekly, responding to his article about Khodorkovsky’s failed parole application. Privalov did not reply or publish Klyuvgant’s letter: he wrote yet another article on the subject himself ...

In my letter of 26 August to the Expert editor Alexander Privalov I asked him to leave the last word to the readers, giving them a chance to make their own judgements about the case and the professionalism of those involved.

Mr Privalov did not want to permit anything so risky. Without trusting his readers, he used his powers as editor to award himself the final word in our discussion. He went on to repeat his erroneous arguments and added, not for the first time, his comment that he found the factual side of the whole business uninteresting. Neither did he take up the offer of a meeting while my clearly expressed readiness to provide all the necessary references at any moment (including rulings handed down by the Constitutional Court) was “cosmetically removed” by his commentary that such references and comments did not exist.

This editorial commentary made it clear that the problem of professionalism not only exists — but has direct application and relevance to the work of the business weekly itself.

It is commonplace for people who persist in their mistakes, delusions and ambitions to become personal when they have no proper arguments and do not want to admit their error. Mr Privalov has not escaped this temptation and has fallen victim to the myths that are persistently foisted on Russian society. It’s all rather sad and boring ...

Nevertheless, our offer stands. As we told Alexander Privalov, we are ready to cooperate and engage in constructive dialogue. Thoughtful readers, meanwhile, will work things out for themselves, especially since it is all quite obvious.

Attorney Vadim Klyuvgant