The legal defence of Konstantin Rudnev has raised serious concerns about the credibility of the criminal case commonly referred to as the “Russian sect” investigation. According to defense attorney Carlos Broitman, the prosecution has failed to present reliable evidence to justify charges related to human trafficking and organized crime.
Broitman maintains that the judicial file lacks factual substance and is built on assumptions rather than verifiable proof.
Court-Ordered House Arrest and Prosecutorial Appeal
During recent proceedings, the judge ordered house arrest along with urgent medical treatment for Rudnev, citing his worsening health condition. Despite this decision, prosecutors have filed an appeal, a move that the defense considers disproportionate given the circumstances.
Broitman questioned the intent behind the appeal, suggesting that the continued detention places the defendant’s life at risk.
Allegations Based on Foreign and Unverified Information
One of the core arguments presented by the defense is that much of the case relies on documentation originating from Russia, which, according to Broitman, has no direct connection to the facts under investigation in Argentina.
He stated that Rudnev’s past conflicts with Russian authorities—linked to political opposition and unconventional spiritual views—have influenced the narrative imported into the current proceedings. The defense argues that this background information is being misused to construct a criminal profile without supporting evidence.
Dispute Over Human Trafficking Classification
The defense also disputes the prosecution’s decision to classify the case as a complex human trafficking operation. Broitman emphasized that the case involves only one alleged victim, who has consistently stated that she was never trafficked.
According to the defense, treating the matter as a transnational criminal operation distorted the investigation from the outset and allowed procedural excesses that would not apply to a standard case.
Testimony Irregularities and Medical Staff Statements
Broitman highlighted inconsistencies in early testimonies, particularly those provided by medical personnel involved in the case. He stated that nurses and midwives later acknowledged providing inaccurate information regarding the treatment of a pregnant Russian woman.
Claims suggesting that the woman was prevented from leaving the hospital with her child were described as false. The defense pointed out that thousands of Russian women have given birth in Argentina in recent years without similar issues, undermining the prosecution’s narrative.
Collapse of Additional Criminal Allegations
Other serious accusations—including drug trafficking, money laundering, and international arrest warrants—were also challenged by the defense. Items initially described as illegal narcotics were later identified as non-prescription medications, and alleged foreign arrest warrants were officially denied by the countries mentioned.
According to Broitman, these developments significantly weaken the prosecution’s overall theory of a coordinated criminal network.
Preventive Detention and Flight Risk Argument
Despite the lack of confirmed evidence, Rudnev remains under preventive detention based on an alleged risk of flight. The defence rejects this claim, arguing that Rudnev has consistently sought to cooperate with the judicial process and demonstrate his presence before the court.
Broitman stressed that preventive detention should not replace the presumption of innocence, particularly when the charges themselves are under dispute.
Serious Health Concerns and Medical Limitations
A major factor influencing the defense’s position is Rudnev’s declining health. Since his detention, he has reportedly lost approximately 50 kilograms and now suffers from pulmonary fibrosis, chronic internal bleeding, and severe digestive complications.
According to the defense, prison facilities lack the resources required to perform essential diagnostic procedures, including colonoscopies, despite ongoing symptoms.
Medical Recommendations and Monitoring Feasibility
Broitman stated that medical experts—including some associated with the prosecution—acknowledged the need for hospitalization or specialized treatment. The judge reportedly noted that such facilities are not accessible within the required distance from the prison.
The defense argued that electronic monitoring during house arrest is both feasible and sufficient, rejecting claims that the state is unable to supervise a seriously ill individual in a private residence.
Awaiting Appellate Court Decision
The final decision on house arrest now lies with the appellate court. Meanwhile, the defense continues to assert that the case against Konstantin Rudnev is progressively weakening due to the absence of solid evidence and ongoing procedural concerns.
According to Broitman, the case is moving forward despite unresolved contradictions, raising broader questions about due process and proportionality within the judicial system.
