<meta name=”verify-v1″ content=”SSJv85Eaq0tltjhryiYjfkVZGRKxOJCgmXXL3GduVQY=” />
kazakh-newspaper-graphics-and-article.pdf
joint-letter-of-reid-and-berkley-march-23-2007.pdf
http://savemark.wordpress.com/google2486d8953c1f14ec.html
May 2, 2007
Dear Concerned Person,
As has been reported in the New York Times and the Las Vegas Sun, Mark Seidenfeld is an American businessman who is in a jail in Almaty, Kazakhstan facing false charges.
On March 7, the Las Vegas Sun reported on Mark’s extradition and detention, and the efforts of U.S. legislators to see to his relief.
On April 23, 2007, Ilan Greenberg of the New York Times wrote a story on Mark’s arrest, and the motives of those who have had him arrested. That story has been syndicated to the International Herald Tribune and various newspapers around the world.
The heart of the matter appears to be a vendetta against Mark Seidenfeld held by the controlling shareholder of OAO “Arna”, doing business in Kazakhstan as “Ducat”.
When the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) was selling its controlling block of stock in OAO Arna to the current controlling shareholder, the current controlling shareholder had to pay approximately $5 million more than he intended to acquire control of OAO Arna. This was because Mark Seidenfeld had obtained a competing bid that was $5 million higher. Therefore, the EBRD received a payment for its shares in OAO Arna based on a valuation of the company at US $23.5 million instead of approximately US $16 million, which was the current controlling shareholder’s original offer. Apparently, an even higher price for the EBRD’s shares in OAO Arna could have been obtained, but for the current controlling shareholder’s right of first refusal to buy the EBRD’s stake. This larger price that was paid for control, plus the fact that Mark Seidenfeld, while he was CEO of OAO Arna, had terminated the current controlling shareholder from his position as a consultant to OAO Arna, appears to be the source of the vendetta against Mark Seidenfeld.
Not long after Mark Seidenfeld was arrested in Blagoveshchensk, Russia on December 7, 2005, a Kazakh lawyer working for Ducat communicated in Blagoveshchensk to a Russian criminal defense attorney defending Mark Seidenfeld that the false charges against Mark Seidenfeld would only be dropped if and when Mark Seidenfeld, or persons who care about Mark Seidenfeld, paid a ransom of between $2.5 and $5 million, approximating the higher price paid to the EBRD for its stake in OAO Arna. The Kazakh lawyer predicted then that Mark Seidenfeld could resist extradition to Kazakhstan for about a year, then Russia would have no choice but to deliver Mark Seidenfeld to Kazakhstan pursuant to treaty obligations.
The Kazakh lawyer said he could assure Mark Seidenfeld would be convicted in Kazakhstan, and the only way out for Mark Seidenfeld would be to pay the ransom.
So far, the legal trap designed by the Kazakh lawyer has unfolded just as he outlined.
Ducat is one of the larger telecommunications companies in Kazakhstan, and is headquartered in Almaty. You may read about Ducat on these sites:
The KITF-2007 Business Convention, April 26-28 Exhibitor’s List;
US Department of Commerce Commercial Services-Telecommunications List, a downloadable document;
A downloadable report from the European Community Market Access Database
and Goliath Business Services’ Company Profile on Ducat Joint Stock Company.
Purpose of this Web site:
The purpose of this website is twofold.
1. The first purpose is publish information about the prosecution of Mark Seidenfeld on false charges.
2. The second purpose is to organize a mass boycott of Ducat’s services by all companies in Kazakhstan managed by persons who are concerned about the continued failure to provide full legal rights to Mark Seidenfeld.
Public information about Ducat indicates that it counts among its clients in Kazakhstan 24 foreign diplomatic representations, 120 foreign firms’ representative offices, and more than 200 foreign companies. It also provides services to the governmental and local authorities.
We request that all foreign companies in Kazakhstan review their use of Ducat’s services and terminate use of Ducat’s services until Ducat has dropped all its false claims against Mark Seidenfeld and Mark has been freed:
This is to request that the US Embassy discontinue using the services of Ducat.
This is to request that all members of the British and American business communities in Kazakhstan review their use of Ducat’s services.
Lists of British companies doing business in Kazakhstan (88 in all) are posted at the Kazakhstan Embassy to the United Kingdom as a downloadable document.
The American Chamber of Commerce lists American companies doing business in Kazakhstan.
Is your company listed here?
If so, would you please bring about the discontinuation of use of Ducat’s services at least until Mark Seidenfeld is freed?
There are numerous other telecommunications companies in Kazakhstan whose services your company may use, including Golden Telecom which has been loyal to Mark Seidenfeld throughout this ordeal since the time of his arrest in December 2005 while travelling to Blagoveshchensk, Russia on Golden Telecom company business.
Please note that Golden Telecom was never a shareholder in OAO Arna, and there was an inaccuracy about this point in the New York Times article, which has been corrected and included as a note at the bottom of the article.
If you would like to learn more about Mark Seidenfeld’s situation, please contact the undersigned.
Sincerely,
Derek A. Bloom
bloomda@gmail.com
