Tobacco scandal

The benefits were introduced at the request of Patriarch Alexy II in 1996 ^[1] “on the possibility of accepting excisable goods as humanitarian aid”, supported by the Russian Ministry of Finance “as an exception” ^[2] . The quotas for the import of excisable goods in the 1990s were a way of providing the state with support to non-profit organizations for the implementation of social programs, including such as the Russian Fund for the Disabled War in Afghanistan , the National Sports Fund , and the 50th Victory Fund .

According to official data of the State Customs Committee of Russia , as of October 15, 1996, 18 billion duty-free cigarettes were imported ^{[2] [3]} , which amounted to 6.6% of the domestic tobacco market in 1996 (268.8–276.8 billion pcs.) ^[4] .

The benefits were canceled at the request of Alexy II ^[5] on November 4, 1996, and in accordance with Presidential Decree of September 18, 1996 No. 1363 “On Strengthening Budget Discipline in Part of Customs Payments”. ^[5]

The incident received wide public coverage in 1997, when the journalist of Moskovsky Komsomolets, Sergey Bychkov, published a series of articles alleging the sale of cigarettes and alcohol (the Ministry of Finance’s order only mentions “church wine ” ^[2] ), naming the then chairman DECR MP Metropolitan of Smolensk and Kaliningrad Cyril "tobacco metropolitan."

The former head of the Russian tax service in 1999-2000, Alexander Pochinok said that “during his work, he had not seen a single document in this area related to Cyril, not a single appeal from him” ^{[6] [7]} . In Izvestia , dated January 23, 2009, Pochinik specified ^[8] :

<...> the government decided to help by allocating quotas for the import of excisable goods to the Russian Orthodox Church, by granting appropriate permission through the government commission for humanitarian aid to import them. At the same time, the Russian Orthodox Church - more precisely, companies close to it - was exempted from customs duties. All this ended sadly for everyone - and for those importers, because many of them suffered, and for the budget. <...> I have not met any documents on the benefits provided to the Church related to the name of Cyril.

According to Alexander Pochink, preferential import of excisable goods was beneficial not to the Russian Orthodox Church, but primarily to numerous intermediaries, while the Church was “crumbled” from the profit ^[8] .

The Russian Orthodox Church does not deny the fact of transactions on the import of tobacco and alcohol products, but does not recognize the personal interest in them of the future Patriarch . Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin ^[9] and religious scholar R. A. Silantyev ^[10] filed lawsuits (and won trials) for libel against journalist Sergei Bychkov on other issues, but this was not done personally regarding media materials about the “tobacco metropolitan” Metropolitan Cyril, nor other hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church.

According to the bishop of Vienna and Austria (now the DECR chairman) Hilarion , voiced in 2009, the future Patriarch took a hit on himself in order to save the Church’s reputation: “ In the nineties I repeatedly asked the metropolitan:“ Why aren’t you responding to these attacks? If you they didn’t sign the documents, why don’t you name the names of those who signed them? ”His answer was always the same:“ I can’t and will not “substitute.” When naming the names, we will strike at the Church. ”He took a hit on myself, but didn’t give anyone’s names. I remember how I asked Bishop Kiri la: “Why don’t you sue a journalist and a newspaper that publishes slanderous articles?” To this he replied that, firstly, the Lord had commanded to turn the right cheek when they hit the left. Secondly, the clergyman wasn’t bothering to resolve issues and in the third place, if the trial begins, the same newspaper and the same journalist will cover it, and even if the court proves the groundlessness of the charges and obliges the newspaper to publish a rebuttal of defamation, while the trial lasted, The church will be poured so much dirt that the damage done to the Church will be even greater . " ^[eleven]

• Mitrokhin N. A. , Edelstein M. Yu. Economic activity of the Russian Orthodox Church and its shadow component / Otv. ed. and auth. foreword L. M. Timofeev. - M .: Russian. state humanity. un-t , 2000.

• Church response On “priests selling vodka and tobacco”