Court of Rostami Safa's case; The fraudulent scheme of the defendants to exit the country's currency

According to the Mehr News Agency, the second session of the second part of the case, Rostami Safa, was held in the second branch of the Tehran Special Economic Crime Court in the morning and evening, and the prosecutor and customs expert on the case.

At the beginning of the session, the prosecutor's representative raised material on the sale of currency in the documentary credits and the status of the parties' settlement, saying: “The defendant (Rostami Safa) at any moment claims that we presented our documents, when was these documents presented?”

The prosecutor's representative told the defendant's lawyers: “In late December, you have been notified of the expert and you had the opportunity for nearly 5 days, but you have provided the documents in the form of a drip and you did not give you any opportunity, and you have to claim any of the court hearing.

Referring to the payment of the currency to all producers and importers, he said, “The currency is a national capital and they are not available to everyone because we have currency restrictions.” The currencies paid to the Rostami Safa Group have been to develop production and create employment domestically. Have you done this? Or have you set up different factories in different countries? You had to enter the raw material, did you do it? Have you created employment? In the last 5 years, all your companies' workers have been rallied in front of various organs, and all responsibility has been with Rostami Safa.

The prosecutor said: “You have received the currencies that are the national capital of the Islamic Republic of Iran to create employment, but you have created a problem.” According to the credit you have received, if you have not imported the goods, it is a clear example of the currency trafficking, and if you have entered the contracts that are concluded, and if the contracts concluded between you and the bank, the exit of the Central Bank's regulations should be considered.

The customs expert said at the court hearing: In the documents where the currency paid to the defendants, in most cases, part of the goods subject to the commitment of the defendants led to the issuance of some customs documents, but the major part of the country was not with the import of goods. The group's manner was that by submitting purchase documents and paying currency through the plaintiff banks to the account of the foreign seller, they claimed to enter the goods if they imported only part of the total amount of goods.

He also added that for a small portion of the green license, they said that the credit had led to the issuance of the license, but did not say how much of the total property of the license was issued. However, the defendants have disregarded the settlement of the bank for nearly twenty years, with disregard for settlement and failure to pay for the deadlines with the bank after nearly twenty years. If they had settled in accordance with the agreement, the matter would have been terminated.

Customs expert continued: Failure to enter the goods, non -payment of funds and non -refunding currency indicates that the intention of the country's currency and investment abroad, which has increased the exchange rate inside and has deprived other producers who need the currency from receiving the currency. On the other hand, the lack of goods into the country and the lack of employment has caused the unemployment of the workers and the Iranian force and investment abroad has led to the use of foreign force abroad.

He said: Obtaining a green customs license that implies the official entry of the goods to the country is part of the total commitment of the defendants, but the defendants say that they have green licenses and customs documents but do not say how much of the whole currency has been imported.

The customs expert said: The only official document is the customs license to enter the country and claims that the goods have not been imported but the license is not accepted, because the person who claims to enter the commodity will be reviewed by experts before issuing a green license and may not be stated in the commodity for which the commodity has been issued, or if the goods are not commodities.

The Transport Expert also stated: The cases we encountered in the case of this group are the lack of compliance with the other documents, the incompatibility of the transportation and the port of the entrance with the agreement with the bank and priority and priority. Dearning It was a history that distorted the credibility of the documents.

He added: “The owner of the goods after receiving the green license must submit it to the bank to submit a obligation and arrange the payment in the bank, but in this case the defendant has not settled in the amount of commercial debt to the banking system and none of the claims of the obligation are accepted.”

Following a hearing the defendants' lawyers, official experts, the central bank representative and representatives of the plaintiff banks, they said their material.

In the end, the court told all parties to the case that you have any reason and that you claim to be effective to send to the court through the system. Regarding the claim of converting foreign exchange commitment to rials in the documentary credentials, the central bank's representative stated that it was not a circular that allows the exchange rate to receive the reference rate, as the directive is related to specific years and has presented specific conditions that do not include any credits in the 1980s.