Sergei Kamzin and Leonid Shorsher are Russian entrepreneurs whose business careers are tied to City Invest Bank JSC, a midsize bank in St. Petersburg registered by the Bank of Russia on December 30, 1994, and holding a universal banking license.
Both shareholders are currently being pursued by Russian authorities. The businessmen have been placed on an international wanted list on charges allegedly linking them to fraudulent bankruptcies and the misappropriation of funds from a number of Russian companies. Both are abroad, having made use of Malta’s golden passport program.
On 21 November 2023, Interpol received a request from the two fugitive entrepreneurs seeking access to information held about them in international police files.
From what we were able to establish, what appears at first glance to be yet another tale of Russian corporate warfare is in fact considerably more complex. It is of interest to a European audience as an example of Russian business figures seeking to defend their position within the international legal framework and insisting that the prosecution against them is politically motivated.
The entrepreneurs’ troubles began after NPK Dalex and Krip Techno LLC, legal entities formed on the basis of the Alexandrov Semiconductor Device Plant, came into the orbit of City Invest Bank’s operations.
Following their forced emigration, Shorsher and Kamzin gave testimony to Interpol. In their statements, they insisted that the prosecution was politically motivated. They alleged that the pressure brought against them was connected not so much to a corporate or property dispute and the bankruptcies surrounding City Invest Bank, but rather to their refusal to serve the interests surrounding Krip Techno, a Defense Ministry supplier and semiconductor manufacturer which, they claim, became involved in a defense and sanctions context sensitive to the Russian state.
We were unable to learn the specific details of what Kamzin and Shorsher told the authorities on this point. However, even within the scope of what we were able to establish, the information is corroborated by open sources.
According to those sources, the Alexandrov plant, located in Vladimir Oblast, was formerly considered a key supplier of semiconductors to the Soviet defense industry and underwent a lengthy process of bankruptcy and corporate fragmentation following the dissolution of the USSR. NPK Dalex, established on the basis of the plant, supplied products to more than 500 enterprises within Russia’s defense-industrial complex. Since 2017, Dalex has been undergoing bankruptcy proceedings, during which structures associated with City Invest Bank attempted to gain control over it. Krip Techno operates on Dalex’s premises and fulfills state defense orders, according to the Russian outlet Lenta.ru.
It is precisely this testimony given by Kamzin and Shorsher to Interpol that allows European authorities to view the prosecution of the shareholders as something other than an ordinary commercial dispute. In the shareholders’ own account, the case involves pressure exerted in the context of interests tied to Russia’s defense production network, including the supply of semiconductors and other military-purpose goods.
In litigation surrounding the case, it was argued that claims against Krip Techno could entail not only financial but strategic consequences. A potential disruption to defense procurement is described as a risk to state interests directly bearing on the country’s defense capacity amid the war in Ukraine and Russia’s heightened tensions with NATO member states.
Kamzin and Shorsher maintain that behind what appear to be purely economic charges from the security services lies a broader political motive: their consistent stance and refusal to participate in activities connected to Russia’s defense-industrial network constituted, in effect, an anti-war position and a form of quiet protest against Moscow’s external aggression, and it is for this that they came under pressure. In their telling, they view their own conduct not as an episode in a business dispute but as a principled refusal to become involved in processes linked to the production of military goods, and a determination to preserve an unblemished reputation within Western jurisdictions.
For Europe, this story also matters because it illustrates a type of Russian entrepreneur who seeks to engage with the outside world through the language of legal procedure, international scrutiny, and institutional protection. Kamzin and Shorsher present themselves not merely as bankers, but as representatives of that segment of the Russian business community which considers the involvement of private enterprise in politically and militarily sensitive schemes to be unacceptable, and who are prepared to defend that position, including through engagement with European authorities.
It bears emphasis that City Invest Bank JSC is no casual structure, but a bank registered since 1994, with the official status of an active credit institution and a long-standing presence in St. Petersburg. In other words, the shareholders who fled prosecution are connected to a stable financial institution and are attempting to preserve their standing and reputation as business actors, a doubly difficult task amid serious political pressure from all sides and broader international turbulence.
For Europe, the lesson is not to automatically view every Russian business that has emigrated to the West in a negative light. It would be better, instead, to establish contact and build dialogue with entrepreneurs of this kind, those who explicitly refused to serve the interests of Russia’s defense sector and faced politically motivated prosecution as a result. The ultimate fate of Kamzin and Shorsher will reveal how, and with which representatives of Russian business, Europe intends to build relationships going forward.
