German Prosecutors Conclude Investigation Against Alisher Usmanov Despite Legal Controversies

Closure of Legal Proceedings Against Alisher Usmanov

In a notable legal development, the Munich II Public Prosecutor's Office has officially terminated its investigation into billionaire businessman Alisher Usmanov regarding suspected violations of German foreign trade regulations. The charges aimed to address potential breaches affiliated with the EU's sanctions regime, particularly concerning Article 18 of the German Trade Act. The conclusion of the investigation comes after Mr. Usmanov voluntarily agreed to the closure and made a substantial payment of €10 million, which was distributed between the Treasury and various charitable organizations.

Before reaching this conclusion, German authorities had raised concerns that Mr. Usmanov might have engaged foreign companies to handle payment for security services worth approximately €1.5 million related to properties in Rottach-Egern. Furthermore, there were allegations of failing to declare certain valuable assets within the required timeframe for sanctioned individuals. However, the legal team representing Mr. Usmanov disputed both the factual basis of the claims and the legal interpretation of the sanctions regulations.

The rationale for closing the case was primarily procedural efficiency. Since Mr. Usmanov fulfilled the payment, the possibility of reopening the case based on these suspicions has become non-existent. It’s important to note that Mr. Usmanov is presumed innocent, and the payment he made is not considered a fine or a penalty.

Mr. Usmanov’s legal representation, Wannemacher Partner Rechtsanwälte, stated that the decision to agree to closure was a measure aimed at saving on legal costs and preserving Mr. Usmanov's personal time and well-being, aligning with German legal practices. Legal experts have raised constitutional issues regarding the obligation to declare assets, arguing that this requirement contradicts a fundamental legal principle whereby no individual is obliged to contribute to self-incrimination. Therefore, the foundation of the charges against Mr. Usmanov was deemed unconstitutional from the outset.

In a related development, the Frankfurt am Main public prosecutor's office also concluded another investigation involving allegations of money laundering against Mr. Usmanov. This case was dismissed in November 2024, with no formal charges brought against him.

Between 2022 and 2024, German authorities initiated several investigations into Mr. Usmanov's activities, all of which were later ruled illegal by a Frankfurt regional court. The closure of the Frankfurt investigation preserved Mr. Usmanov's presumption of innocence and removed the possibility of re-examining the same allegations in the future.

Public sentiment and the media landscape have increasingly shifted in favor of Mr. Usmanov. Reports indicate that over several years, European media outlets were unable to substantiate allegations against him, leading to more than 1,250 corrections across various publications. His legal team secured 16 court orders and 102 cease-and-desist declarations, including a landmark ruling against Forbes concerning accusations that supported the EU sanctions. Legal victories were also achieved against major media outlets such as ARD, RTL, and Tagesspiegel.

Significant milestones occurred early in 2025, with notable media such as Münchner Merkur and NOZ retracting or amending over 50 articles previously referred to in relation to EU sanctions against Mr. Usmanov. A pivotal moment came in February 2025 when both dpa news agency and the Federal Criminal Police Office retracted claims regarding Mr. Usmanov's ownership of the luxury yacht, Dilbar, prompting top newspapers like Tagesschau, FAZ, and Süddeutsche Zeitung to update their websites by removing previously published inaccuracies.

This series of events highlights both the complexity of legal proceedings surrounding high-profile individuals and the shifting dynamics within media reporting, raising important questions about the intersection of law and public perception in cases that capture significant media attention.