:00:13. > :00:17.Anyone hoping for a better grade in their GCSE English this summer,
:00:17. > :00:22.tough, you are stuck with your result, even though we know, six
:00:22. > :00:26.months before you would have had an easier ride. The exam regulators
:00:26. > :00:30.agree GCSEs were marked less generously than in January. They
:00:30. > :00:34.are not about to do anything to placate students or teachers.
:00:34. > :00:43.make as mock reeft league tables, they are meaningless, unless you
:00:43. > :00:47.know when schools entered their students for GCSE. The Chief
:00:47. > :00:50.Regulator at Ofqual will explain why it is OK for some students to
:00:50. > :00:54.get lucky. The man who decided to fight his
:00:54. > :00:59.domestic feud in front of a judge. Too bad she didn't see her way.
:00:59. > :01:03.Today she tried to rewrite Russian history, it is not allowed by an
:01:03. > :01:08.English judge in a court. Debate whether the English courts got it
:01:08. > :01:16.wrong. Why is London the place for legal battles, entirely about
:01:16. > :01:21.Russia. The exam regulator has dashed hopes
:01:22. > :01:26.that English GCSEs from this summer might be revisited, despite a huge
:01:26. > :01:31.outcry over thousands of students in England who did worse than
:01:31. > :01:35.expected. Ofqual admitted today that June's exams were marked more
:01:35. > :01:40.harshly than the same exam taken in January. But said today, that's
:01:40. > :01:43.life, the January candidates got a lucky break. The problem is,
:01:43. > :01:47.thousands of 16-year-olds are seeing their plans for the future
:01:47. > :01:51.thrown into the balance. And are wishing they were in the small
:01:51. > :01:57.percentage of those who had gone into the exams six months earlier.
:01:57. > :02:03.In the row over GCSE grading, today was the turn of the exam regulator
:02:03. > :02:07.to offer its submission. And answer question 1, what, if anything had
:02:07. > :02:11.gone wrong? The job we have to do is to make sure that standards are
:02:11. > :02:15.maintained and standards are right. We know that was the case in June,
:02:15. > :02:23.we can see that in January there was a level of generosity, a very
:02:23. > :02:27.small number of students there got a lucky break. No lucky break at
:02:27. > :02:32.Burlington Danes, one of the education secretary's favourite
:02:32. > :02:38.academies. Student took the exam in June, the school's senior teachers
:02:38. > :02:43.saw the number of those getting five good GCSEs fall from 75% last
:02:43. > :02:46.year to 64%. I'm not in a position to judge whether the grade
:02:46. > :02:51.boundaries were too generous in January. All I know is it is not
:02:51. > :02:55.fair. I felt sick, actually, when I got the results. I was so shocked
:02:55. > :03:00.on the day the English results came in, I can really remember my
:03:00. > :03:06.feeling on that day, when we just, when D after D after D came out on
:03:06. > :03:12.the results. I couldn't believe it. We were in a total state of shock.
:03:12. > :03:20.For the first time, since 1988, the percentage of pupils getting A*-C
:03:20. > :03:25.in English language fell from 65.4% to 63.9% this summer. This year's
:03:25. > :03:32.English GCSE was a new exam, part marked in schools, part by Exam
:03:32. > :03:36.Boards. In March it emerged to get a C grade on the AQA foundation
:03:36. > :03:40.paper, that some students sat in January, required 43 mark, teachers
:03:40. > :03:45.worked on this basis, last week we learned that boundary had shifted
:03:45. > :03:50.for the June exams, up to 53 marks, and boundaries were raised for
:03:51. > :03:53.course work too, and other boards. We are happy with grade boundaries
:03:53. > :03:58.changing between years, but not within the same year. I think
:03:58. > :04:01.that's been the issue. It's been particularly with the control
:04:01. > :04:06.assessments, or the work done in school, where a piece of work is
:04:06. > :04:09.worth a C in January, and a D in June. That is where it seems
:04:09. > :04:13.completely unfair. That's for exactly the same piece of work?
:04:13. > :04:18.It is important to be clear that, as a school, we want to raise
:04:18. > :04:21.standards, and we want exams to become more difficult, more
:04:21. > :04:25.rigorous exam criteria, we strive for students to do better and
:04:25. > :04:30.better. However, it just feels that you're differentiating between a
:04:30. > :04:34.point of entry, if a child was entered in January, as many schools
:04:34. > :04:39.did early entry, they will achieve better grades than students entered
:04:39. > :04:43.at the end of the year. Because Ofqual wants to end grade inflation,
:04:43. > :04:49.it said exam results, or outcomes, must be comparable with those of
:04:49. > :04:52.previous years. That's hard to do with a new partly modular test,
:04:52. > :04:57.where students have done some assessments in spring, and got
:04:57. > :05:01.those grades, and then done a final exam. The whole comparable outcomes
:05:01. > :05:07.approach is based on, essentially, rationing the number of top grades.
:05:07. > :05:10.And you can only do that once you see the full picture of every
:05:10. > :05:13.candidate's performance. And the problem is, with a modular system,
:05:13. > :05:17.you don't see all that until the end, but you have already awarded
:05:17. > :05:21.some of the grades on the way. So, I think it is pretty hard to do
:05:21. > :05:27.that without some kind of adjustment like what we have seen,
:05:27. > :05:30.you would hope it wouldn't be quite on the scale we have seen, but I
:05:30. > :05:35.don't think it's really credible that you can get rid of it all
:05:35. > :05:40.together. If you are a victim of this adjustment, it is hard to
:05:40. > :05:45.understand. It is pretty clear that it is not us that's really the
:05:45. > :05:52.problem. It is mainly because they have suddenly changed the grade
:05:52. > :05:56.boundaries and marked us down. Someone could have missed a C by
:05:56. > :06:04.one mark. Like you? Yes, but someone who did it in January could
:06:04. > :06:13.have got a C by one mark, but they got the same marks as me. Ofqual's
:06:13. > :06:19.deseffectively rewards schools that put pupils in early to -- Ofqual's
:06:19. > :06:24.deseffectively rewards schools that put pupils in early for exams.
:06:24. > :06:27.Ironically Michael Gove says he wants this to end, he wants all
:06:27. > :06:30.students sitting an exam in summer. There is a basic issue of fairness
:06:30. > :06:34.here, that calls into question the credibility of the way the system
:06:34. > :06:38.is being run. It cannot be right you will have two students with
:06:38. > :06:43.similar quality of work, one of who's work is put in January and
:06:43. > :06:47.they get a C, another who puts it in the summer and they get a D.
:06:47. > :06:51.This effects life chances, and the ability to go on to college and
:06:51. > :06:56.sixth form. It makes comparisons between schools much less
:06:56. > :07:01.meaningful than they normally are. Schools are judged on different
:07:01. > :07:06.sets of grade boundaries. It makes a mockery of the league tables?
:07:06. > :07:12.does. They become meaningless, you know when a school entered children
:07:12. > :07:16.for GCSE in English. Ofqual is offering resits. Head teachers are
:07:16. > :07:22.furious, and the inquiry is offer, and still threatening legal action.
:07:22. > :07:30.In our Birmingham studio know is the Chief Regulator of Ofqual
:07:30. > :07:34.Glenys Stacey. Why is it, whose job -- someone whose job it is to look
:07:34. > :07:38.at standards, has described today as students getting a lucky break?
:07:39. > :07:45.The concerns have been expressed quickly from schools and colleges.
:07:45. > :07:52.There are a good number of units or moduals now underpinning GCSEs. We
:07:52. > :07:59.have managed to pin it down to a handful of units, some in January
:07:59. > :08:02.and some in June. We have looked closely at the grade boundary
:08:02. > :08:09.settings in all of the exam boards, and looked at the professional
:08:09. > :08:14.judgment of the examers there, and we can examiners in June, and we
:08:14. > :08:18.can see when most sat the papers, the material was sound, examiners
:08:18. > :08:21.were able to use the material to set the judgment, and they were
:08:21. > :08:24.able to use a lot of data and information to make sure their
:08:24. > :08:29.judgments were right. The point is the comparison between the marking
:08:29. > :08:33.and the results in June, and in January. How is it acceptable that
:08:33. > :08:37.luck played a part in a system in a country like our's? If I can come
:08:37. > :08:44.to that. When these units were first sat in January, first of all,
:08:44. > :08:49.very few students sat them. If we look at AQA, the biggest provider
:08:49. > :08:54.for English, only 2 out of every 100 students sat them in January.
:08:54. > :08:57.What you had there, were professional examiners, looking at
:08:57. > :09:00.the material, they had precious little to go on. They were new
:09:00. > :09:04.qualifications as well. So they were setting standards without
:09:05. > :09:07.really a past history to go on. And we know, having spoken with the
:09:07. > :09:10.expert, that is particularly difficult in English. I'm sure you
:09:10. > :09:14.can find all sorts of reasons that all of this has happened, but the
:09:14. > :09:19.fact of the matter, you accept the system you preside over is not fair
:09:19. > :09:24.system. It has not been fair to all 16-year-olds who sat GCSE English
:09:24. > :09:29.this year? Our job as a regulator is to make sure standards are right.
:09:29. > :09:33.We don't just have to do it for this year. Is it a fair system for
:09:33. > :09:35.everyone who sat the exam this year? We have to do it for all the
:09:36. > :09:39.years. We have to make sure standards are right overall. We
:09:39. > :09:45.have done that. Is it fair to everyone who sat the exam this year,
:09:45. > :09:48.simple yes or no? It is as fair as it can be. If I can say that some
:09:48. > :09:52.solutions are on the way. We have spoken about the complexity about
:09:53. > :09:56.it, and moderate approaches. We are moving away from that. We are
:09:56. > :10:02.moving to linear examinations and assessments from now on. Would you
:10:02. > :10:05.like to apologise to those who sat the exam in June, and were marked
:10:05. > :10:10.more harshly than counterparts six months earlier? What I would like
:10:10. > :10:12.to say to those who sat the exams in June, is we have looked very
:10:13. > :10:18.closely to see if there is anything wrong with your grades, and there
:10:18. > :10:21.isn't. The grades are right. But, nevertheless, we think that you
:10:21. > :10:25.have expierenceed quite a so the of anxiety and uncertainty, we don't
:10:26. > :10:30.think that is right. We are very pleased that exam boards are
:10:30. > :10:33.offering you the opportunity to resit should you wish to do so.
:10:33. > :10:36.would like to apologise to them? would certainly say things could
:10:36. > :10:39.have gone better for them, and they haven't been helped by the
:10:39. > :10:44.complexity of the system, and also by the expectations that have been
:10:44. > :10:47.set for them. They have been unlucky, then. Luck has been an
:10:47. > :10:51.unfortunate part of a system that actually should be about fairness
:10:51. > :10:56.right across the board? They have had proper grades awarded in June.
:10:56. > :11:00.The people that were lucky were the precious few, if you like, who took
:11:01. > :11:04.these units in January. So, if the ones in June, if their results are
:11:04. > :11:11.correct, and if you standby those results, then if you look at the
:11:11. > :11:14.fact it is the first fall in 24 years of GCSE, then those summer
:11:14. > :11:17.GCSE candidates were less intelligent than any of those in
:11:18. > :11:22.the previous 24 years? No, they are not. What has happened is until
:11:22. > :11:27.this time, we used to have two English qualifications, there was a
:11:27. > :11:32.change a couple of years ago, it is the first time the exams have come
:11:32. > :11:34.to full fruition, they are completely different now, there are
:11:34. > :11:39.three qualifications. The qualification has changed and the
:11:39. > :11:43.candidates have changed. Some have gone to i-gcse, for example, the
:11:43. > :11:47.examiners are trying to make sure the same standard is maintained
:11:47. > :11:51.through change. There is a really important point for the future.
:11:51. > :11:55.That when qualifications change, like this, it is very, very
:11:56. > :11:59.difficult for examiners to keep standards maintained. Again, we go
:11:59. > :12:05.back to this rather unfortunate situation, then, the ones this
:12:05. > :12:09.summer were unlucky, that happen to be summer GCSE students in 2012?
:12:09. > :12:13.is not that they were unlucky. They had been studying these
:12:13. > :12:17.qualifications for two years, they came out with the right grades. The
:12:17. > :12:19.issue is the way the system work when a few candidates only took the
:12:19. > :12:24.units earlier, it was very difficult to get the standards
:12:24. > :12:28.right. It looks like they were right at the time when the
:12:28. > :12:30.professional examiners were doing it. This story isn't over, are you
:12:30. > :12:33.preparing for legal action, that is the threat talked about in a
:12:34. > :12:37.concrete way today? I have heard that. Of course, if that is going
:12:38. > :12:42.to happen, it is going to happen. What I will say, again, we do have
:12:42. > :12:48.to maintain standards for last year, this year, next year and so on. We
:12:48. > :12:55.really can't waver or change, because a few students got lucky in
:12:55. > :13:00.January. Thank you very much. We have the
:13:00. > :13:03.master of Wellington college, and the principle of George Green
:13:03. > :13:07.Comprehensive skal school, in East London.
:13:07. > :13:10.What do you think of Glenys Stacey's explanation? I'm appalled,
:13:10. > :13:14.I'm absolutely furious. As indeed are hundreds of head teachers up
:13:14. > :13:20.and down the country. This is really not going toened here. There
:13:20. > :13:25.will be legal Chancellor -- to end here. There will be legal
:13:25. > :13:29.challenges. This is a human story, we have youngsters, those at the C-
:13:29. > :13:33.D bordeline, those in disadvantaged communities, who have suffered here.
:13:33. > :13:43.Their whole life chances. Luck has nothing to do with it, this has
:13:43. > :13:45.
:13:45. > :13:50.nothing to do with standards, it is about making things fit. These are
:13:50. > :13:56.teething problems? That is not thes' fault, we have followed what
:13:56. > :14:04.we were asked to do as schools. The nonsense about nuke and -- nonsense
:14:04. > :14:08.about luck and sitting the exam in January. My students did 40% in
:14:08. > :14:12.January, and then they did the listening assessment and put those
:14:12. > :14:17.forward in June. You have students marked under different systems, it
:14:17. > :14:20.is not right or acceptable. have been talking for years,
:14:20. > :14:26.disparagingly about grade inflation, are you pleased, do you see this as
:14:26. > :14:30.the system correcting itself? think it is a good thing that the
:14:30. > :14:36.endless rise in grades year-on-year has come to an end, after 24 years.
:14:36. > :14:41.I think it is a good thing for many reasons. I think it will restore
:14:41. > :14:48.confidence to the system from universities, and from employers,
:14:48. > :14:53.and the general public, that grade As really do mean what they say. My
:14:53. > :14:57.school takes the international baccalaureate, it has had zero
:14:57. > :15:01.grade inflation for 40 years. You can have that and maintain
:15:01. > :15:06.standards. That was inevitable. But, I think it is really appalling the
:15:06. > :15:10.way that it has happened. And it is terribly sad for these children.
:15:10. > :15:14.Who really feel that a big injustice has been done to them. I
:15:14. > :15:17.think it is very sad for the teachers in those schools, and the
:15:17. > :15:22.schools themselves, who really cling on these grades. They are so
:15:22. > :15:26.important to the children, for entry into the sixth form, and
:15:26. > :15:32.entry into whatever jobs they might go on to do and for university, and
:15:32. > :15:37.schools. The way they are judged by the Government. I think that the
:15:37. > :15:41.solution of this November resit seems to be an admission that
:15:41. > :15:45.Ofqual got it wrong any way. They are being offered the chance for a
:15:45. > :15:49.resit? What will that help. It will be so hard. Why do you think this
:15:50. > :15:52.is happening now. The comparable outcome system was a new system.
:15:52. > :15:58.Michael Gove has said the Exam Boards make independent decision,
:15:58. > :16:02.what do you think? Michael Gove says that and Ofqual say that, I
:16:02. > :16:05.don't believe it, and no headteacher I have met believes it.
:16:05. > :16:09.The Exam Boards have been indirectly affected by the talk of
:16:09. > :16:14.raising standards. Can I come back to the point about resitting in
:16:14. > :16:20.November. There seems to be, that neither Ofqual or the examiner
:16:20. > :16:22.understand how resits work. You can't just resit it in November,
:16:22. > :16:25.you have completely different controlled assessment, children
:16:25. > :16:30.have to be taught, prepared and supervised, when they can be all
:16:30. > :16:34.over the place. It is not possible. They don't understand how schools
:16:34. > :16:38.workk and how important this is. It is clear to me that Ofqual do not
:16:38. > :16:44.understand the processes, and the way children are tracked from the
:16:44. > :16:49.minute they leave primary school to the end game. Raise On-line, the
:16:49. > :16:54.database we are all judged on, will now be a nonsense. The head
:16:54. > :16:59.teachers, as I am preparing for Ofsted in the autumn term, our data
:16:59. > :17:01.is completely up the creek. It is nonsense. The point about the exam
:17:02. > :17:06.boards, what do you believe about the suggestion, and it is believed
:17:07. > :17:11.by many people, that there has been an element of political influence,
:17:11. > :17:15.if not interference? I don't know what the answer is. I very much
:17:15. > :17:19.doubt that Michael Gove, directly, had had any influence on Ofqual. I
:17:19. > :17:24.think that was Ofqual, myself, my judgment is that was Ofqual
:17:24. > :17:29.reaching their own decision about what was right. But, doing it in a
:17:29. > :17:34.very niave and insensitive way, and the fact you have so many outraged
:17:34. > :17:40.teachers who are often supportive of Government policy, supportive of
:17:40. > :17:43.the whole drift, as is Kenny, who has done remarkable work in her
:17:44. > :17:48.school to raise standards. People are appalled by this, and it shows
:17:48. > :17:53.a lack of sensitivity and preparation. If this was a new
:17:53. > :17:56.system and thatch harder to get the C grades. Or confidence, are Ofqual
:17:56. > :18:00.good enough to be doing the very important job of regulating the
:18:00. > :18:03.exam boards? We should have been prepared for it. Shocks should not
:18:03. > :18:08.have been allowed to happen. We should have been prepared for it.
:18:08. > :18:12.They have upset a lot of very decent, hard-working teacher, heads,
:18:12. > :18:18.schools, and above all, the candidates, the students themselves.
:18:18. > :18:22.It need not have happened. If is Ofqual up to the job? I have no
:18:22. > :18:26.confidence. I really have no confidence at all, they had to be
:18:26. > :18:32.forced into this investigation. The initial reaction was there was no
:18:32. > :18:35.problem. It was only in response to the unions that made them do this
:18:35. > :18:39.investigation. It has been very quick and it will not lie there.
:18:39. > :18:42.When we go back to school on Monday, we will be gathering the views of
:18:42. > :18:49.parents and the community. Who will certainly not be happy with this.
:18:49. > :18:54.It don't end here. One of the most expensive court
:18:54. > :19:01.battles ever heard in England came to an end today, with the final
:19:01. > :19:05.bill in Abramovich versus Berezovsky estimated at �1 billion.
:19:05. > :19:11.It was not a good end for Boris Berezovsky, who looks at playing
:19:11. > :19:15.the bill. The judge dismissed his claims saying he was an unreliable
:19:16. > :19:20.witnesses and downright dishonest. It is also seen as a verdict on
:19:20. > :19:25.Vladimir Putin, Mr Berezovsky felt he thought Putin himself wrote the
:19:25. > :19:30.judgment. It was a battle that consumed three
:19:30. > :19:36.months of court time. Thousands of pages of evidence. And tens of
:19:36. > :19:40.millions of pounds in legal fees and costs. A dual between two
:19:40. > :19:46.Russian tycoons, their chosen weapon, the unveiling blade of
:19:46. > :19:51.English justice. The challenger, Boris Berezovsky, once the ultimate
:19:51. > :19:57.oligarch, now an angry exile, the Kremlin's implacable enemy. The
:19:57. > :20:01.defendant, the man he once regarded as his son, Roman Abramovich, who
:20:01. > :20:07.stayed loyal to Putin, and came to far outglitter Berezovsky in wealth.
:20:07. > :20:13.At stake, the �5 billion Berezovsky said Abramovich owed him for his
:20:13. > :20:18.share in one of Russia's most lucrative oil companies. Abramovich
:20:18. > :20:23.said Berezovsky never had any such share. Today, the shiny new temple
:20:23. > :20:30.of truth, that is the High Court's Rolls building, was besieged, as
:20:30. > :20:34.inside English Jews at the, in the form of Mrs Justice Gloster, agreed
:20:34. > :20:40.with Abramovich. Sensationally she dismissed Mrs Berezovsky's entire
:20:40. > :20:45.suit. It took man with all his irrepressible showmanship, to face
:20:45. > :20:49.down such a draining financial disaster. I'm amazed with what
:20:49. > :20:56.happened today. Sometimes I had the impression that Putin himself wrote
:20:56. > :21:00.this judgment. Sometimes I have this impression. Putin, supported
:21:00. > :21:06.by a London court? Many will see this as a triumph, not just for Mr
:21:06. > :21:09.Abramovich, but for the reputation of English justice. It has proved
:21:09. > :21:13.its shiny neutrality, by humiliating the man, who most
:21:13. > :21:20.believed in Britain and British institution, Boris Berezovsky. And
:21:20. > :21:25.it is expressively vindicated his opponent, Roman Abramovich, but
:21:25. > :21:28.also his arch enemy, Vladimir Putin, who has been so angry with Britain
:21:28. > :21:32.for sheltering his critics. Berezovsky, the judge said, was
:21:32. > :21:36.wrong to have accused Putin for threatening him. What does it mean
:21:36. > :21:40.politically, you heard what the judge said about President Putin,
:21:40. > :21:46.that he put no pressure, it was said? Again, this is one of the
:21:46. > :21:50.crucial points. Today she tried to rewrite Russian his treatment it is
:21:50. > :21:56.not allowed by a judge in English courts.
:21:56. > :22:01.The murky world of 1990s Russia, that Mrs Justice Gloster was
:22:01. > :22:05.insited to explore, was compared to court to England in the 15th
:22:05. > :22:10.century. A world of intrigue and skullduggery, where a supreme fixer
:22:10. > :22:15.like Berezovsky could make or unmake fortunes. You might have
:22:15. > :22:20.expected her ladyship to suggest, in a judicialiously English way,
:22:20. > :22:25.that all the characters were -- judiciously English way that all
:22:25. > :22:28.these characters were as bad as each other, but no, her sword came
:22:28. > :22:33.down unambiguously on Mr Berezovsky's head. He was a witness
:22:33. > :22:38.that regarded truth as a transitory, flexible concept, that could be
:22:38. > :22:41.moulded to suit his current circumstances. Mr Abramovich gave
:22:42. > :22:46.careful and thoughtful answers, she said, he was frank making
:22:46. > :22:51.concessions where they were due. As for Mr Putin, the judge accepted
:22:51. > :22:57.the evidence of a Kremlin witness, that the Russian President never
:22:57. > :23:01.intimidated Berezovsky into selling his stake in the TV company, ORT, a
:23:01. > :23:06.judgment the plaintiff found particularly unhistorical. It is
:23:06. > :23:11.common knowledge all over the world that I did not sell ORT by my will,
:23:11. > :23:18.I was under pressure, and even I left Russia and granted political
:23:18. > :23:23.asylum, and the crucial point was that Putin attempted to control the
:23:23. > :23:27.mass media. The chief Godfather in this tale, in the court's view, was
:23:27. > :23:31.apparently not Putin, but Berezovsky himself. The millions
:23:31. > :23:36.Abramovich paid him to finance his luxury lifestyle, were not shares
:23:36. > :23:44.in a joint business venture, they were ad hoc payments to the head of
:23:44. > :23:50.a protection racket. Payments known in Russian as krysha. Although the
:23:50. > :23:58.krysha is well known in Russia. It is known in the courts as well, in
:23:58. > :24:02.the Russian courts. This is the first time the essence of that word
:24:02. > :24:10.and the word was used in the international court. So this is a
:24:10. > :24:20.very significant judgment all together. In deepest Siberia, there
:24:20. > :24:26.is another tycoon, who is delighted about that. Mr Derry pass ka, the
:24:26. > :24:30.billionare alluminium king, has been summoned to Russia to answer
:24:30. > :24:36.for his huge fortune. One of the claims will be the claimant was a
:24:36. > :24:41.protector, not a partner. But that claimant, Michael ch. Erney, won't
:24:41. > :24:49.be here when the -- Cherney, won't be here when the court mites,
:24:49. > :24:52.wanted on allegations of money laundering, he stays in Israel. The
:24:53. > :24:56.stampede of rich Russians wanting to lig gate in London seems
:24:56. > :25:00.unstoppable. The Government wants law to be an exportable product
:25:00. > :25:04.from the UK. They want London to be seen as a litigation centre around
:25:04. > :25:09.the globe. But on the other hand, some lawyers would argue that
:25:09. > :25:15.perhaps, do we really want these oligarchs with perhaps shadey
:25:15. > :25:19.backgrounds, litigating in London. It is a question of morals for us.
:25:19. > :25:23.Pwher Berezovsky has learned an expensive -- Boris Berezovsky has
:25:23. > :25:27.learned an expensive lesson about the blindness of English justice.
:25:27. > :25:32.Some will hope our courts don't get too much of a taste for rewriting
:25:32. > :25:38.other country's history. Alex Goldfarb, Boris Berezovsky's
:25:38. > :25:44.close friend is with us, and volumes volumes volumes head of the
:25:44. > :25:47.Russian -- Anton Volskiy, head of a Russian T vision station. Boris
:25:47. > :25:52.Berezovsky chose to bring this case, how do you feel about English
:25:52. > :25:59.justice today? I'm very disappointed by this ruling. It was
:25:59. > :26:06.obviously a very subjective ruling by Judge Gloster, who got it all
:26:06. > :26:12.wrong. I was there, I saw the events that were discussed in court.
:26:12. > :26:22.I know, for a fact, that Mr Berezovsky was inTim dated by Mr
:26:22. > :26:26.
:26:26. > :26:31.Abramovich, on behalf of Mr Putin. By passing this judgment, the
:26:31. > :26:35.implications are that the corrupt and murderous regime of Mr Putin
:26:35. > :26:39.got a tremendous boost, both internationally and domestically.
:26:39. > :26:43.You say Boris Berezovsky was intimidated by this setting, the
:26:43. > :26:48.fact is, he didn't do himself any favour, the judge not only thought
:26:48. > :26:51.he was unimpressive, but she thought he treated the truth as a
:26:51. > :26:56.flexible concept, and he was entirely unreliable as a witness?
:26:56. > :27:04.think the judge made a mistake, to call Mr Abramovich a reliable
:27:04. > :27:09.witness, is actually laughable as a statement to anyone. That is your
:27:09. > :27:14.thoughts? Anyone who is Russian knows that. There are credible
:27:14. > :27:22.claims that Mr Putin's personal beneficiary of the proceeds of this
:27:22. > :27:25.transaction, and that Mr Abramovich is his actual personal banker.
:27:25. > :27:29.Anyone who reads the Financial Times can see the evidence of how
:27:29. > :27:34.Mr Abramovich's money was laundered and used to buy Mr Putin's palace.
:27:34. > :27:38.What do you make, Anton Volskiy, of that view, that this judgment was
:27:38. > :27:44.entirely subjective in Alex Goldfarb's view? I cannot say that
:27:44. > :27:50.it was a subjective thing, it was, as the British courts, objective.
:27:50. > :27:53.In Russia, by the way, both oligarchs, they don't have a
:27:53. > :28:03.credible image. They are very unpopular, both of them. Because
:28:03. > :28:03.
:28:03. > :28:09.everybody knows, everybody doesn't know where the money comes from.
:28:09. > :28:13.When you look at the case, it is not just about the behaviour of the
:28:13. > :28:18.oligarchs, the picture of your country was unflattering. It is
:28:18. > :28:22.wealth being divided up ash trairly, it is Mafia money, and a legal
:28:23. > :28:28.system not robust enough to hear these cases on home turf? It is
:28:28. > :28:34.true and not true. We all knew what the Russian economics and politics
:28:34. > :28:42.used to be in the 1990s. We knew that, cite Shah and all these
:28:42. > :28:46.things. Prob -- krysha, and all those things. Probably Putin came
:28:46. > :28:51.into power and said he would make the state of law. It is not
:28:51. > :28:55.accurate to say Russian oligarchs set their deals here in the court.
:28:55. > :29:05.Boris Berezovsky is a British resident for more than ten years
:29:05. > :29:06.
:29:06. > :29:10.already. The same thing with the other trial, Derripaska. These
:29:10. > :29:15.cases are all about events in Russia, the content of the case has
:29:15. > :29:18.nothing to do with Britain. After what you have seen happen in this
:29:19. > :29:22.particular case, given the fact there are more cases on their way.
:29:22. > :29:29.Would you still advise that London is the right place to hear these
:29:29. > :29:34.kinds of cases? By default, yes. There is no legal system in Russia.
:29:34. > :29:39.We have recently seen the case of Pussyriot, there are tens of
:29:39. > :29:44.thousands of businessmen whose assets were appropriated by people
:29:44. > :29:53.associated with this regime and who are languishing in Russian jails.
:29:54. > :30:00.Starting with Mr Korvokovsky. What is important now, the whole
:30:00. > :30:05.democracy movement now, that is actually opposing Mr Putin's
:30:05. > :30:09.policies, now feels that the regime got a tremendous boost. Did the
:30:09. > :30:13.regime get a boost from this, a good day for the Kremlin on the
:30:13. > :30:19.back of an English judge? There was a comment from the Kremlin today.
:30:19. > :30:23.They are satisfied with the case because the liar was called a liar.
:30:24. > :30:28.They say that Berezovsky is a liar, and now it is confirmed by the
:30:28. > :30:37.British court. I think this was a case about money. Berezovsky wanted
:30:37. > :30:39.money from Abramovich, he didn't get money, let's not do from this
:30:39. > :30:44.economic case, money is the biggest thing.
:30:44. > :30:50.It is Friday night, which mean Review is up next. Kirsty is there.
:30:50. > :30:55.What have you got for us? We have been bringing you dark
:30:55. > :31:02.theatre from Edinburgh, Zadie Smith's new book, and a Turner
:31:02. > :31:07.Prize's winner, weird sounds for The One Show. All that and Bob
:31:07. > :31:12.Dylan's new album, Tempesst. Join me and my guests in a moment.