MEJenssen, I was confused by the last sentence "... More curiously, however, no orders were issued to find those responsible for the past offences and bring them to justice...". May be I fail to see anything "curious" here, and it may just be something "lost in translation". I felt that the President did exactly what is expected and turned the matter over to the authorities in charge. My concern is the media. Media in Russia is still going through its growing pains. There is often a lack of realization that mixing facts and speculation is sometimes a very serious offense. When talking about celebrieties, getting attention is the name of the game. But when dealing with a corruption, or the issues surrounding, for example, Artic Sea affair, I find loosey-goosey attitude by many journalists infuriating. Even many analysts engage in the speculation by using suggestive language, that would make one believe they actually know things for a fact --- even though it is physically impossible. I have so many examples, I can write a book! Given this weakness, the last thing one needs is the Russian media jumping to conclusions, making up scenarios out of thin air, and then everybody ends up with a mud on the face. The Government, the accussed, their companies, families, friends. And the "controversy" never goes away, because there will always be those who will claim that "not all answers are known...", and the circus can go on, and on. The you will probably have Mossad agents running after the culprits --- you get the picture. I applaud the effort, but a great deal of maturity will be required by the media to stick with the story faithfully, and not look for the "sensation".

@ Bianca, you raise a valid concern about "witch hunts". However I think the safety mechanism for that is in your last sentence: "competent staff". As long as those investigating the allegations are professional and unemotional, there should not be a problem (but you do have to have somebody else "watching the watchers"). This could end up being a sort of "on-line court". If the allegation is publicly posted, then any acquittal should be made public as well.

What I find "curious" in this report is the insinuation by the writer that the President did not take any action to find the wrongdoers. But he did issue the order to the appropriate agency to do just that? Being that he is not Peter The Great, he himself will not run after the wrongdoers, and then punish them with his own hands! There are agencies that need to dig into this. And, as we all know, sometimes there may not be anything illigal. It is really good that people report on anything that has the "odor" of corruption, because more often then not, there are problems. But I am also hoping that the relavant agencies will apply the law, and not go on a witch hunt. Otherwise, a good citizen-initiated practice can become just a means for settling scores, and worse yet, shut up opponents. That is why applaud President for moving the process to the competent staff.

Keep flipping the rocks over, guys. The ones who like to operate in the dark hate the fresh air. Good luck to all the anti-corruption whistle-blowers.

Well done RT, the start of a nice list, I couldn't ask for more! - why not make this a monthly article, or constant accessable corruption list. You could even rank them and have a top 10. Really glad you are bringing across our Russian input, after all this Russia Today!