In detailing the grounds for declining Khodorkovsky’s application for parole the judge made no mention of repentance

Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s defence team fundamentally disagree with the decision reached by Judge Falileyev of the Ingodinsky district court and intend to make a formal appeal against it.

At the same time, they consider it essential to publish the text of the ruling since the arguments employed by Judge Falileyev in reaching his decision are, contrary to recent and ongoing public discussion, in no way founded on whether their client did or did not repent his actions (and this, they consider, is the proper lawful approach).

The refusal to grant release on parole was based on three grounds, and three alone:

One, Khodorkovsky “did not express a wish to acquire occupational training”;

Two, Khodorkovsky “is still being punished for a violation of the prison regulations”;

Three, “Mikhail B. Khodorkovsky has not earned positive recommendations” while in prison.

The repeated claims that Khodorkovsky’s disinclination to repent played a key role in the outcome of the judicial hearing, therefore, may have many different sources but they certainly are not based on the decision reached by the court.