U.N. INVESTIGATION Report on oil-for-food scandal meets with outrage and denial

One Russian leader called for the report's writers to be punished for a mistake.
MOSCOW (AP) -- A scathing report on corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program for Saddam Hussein's Iraq drew widespread denials, terse dismissals and protestations of innocence Friday. But there were also pledges to investigate from some of the 2,200 companies cited and countries with citizens named.
Russian officials angrily alleged that documents accusing companies and officials in that country were fake, and the head of the nation's electricity monopoly called for the report's writers to be punished. But in a rare partial admission, Sweden's Volvo AB acknowledged making payments through an agent to Iraqi authorities but said it did not consider that bribery.
The U.N. report issued Thursday rattled reputations around the world with charges of kickbacks in lucrative contracts in the 1996-2003 program, under which Iraq was allowed to sell oil provided the proceeds went to buying humanitarian goods to help offset U.N. sanctions.
Saddam corrupted the program by awarding contracts to -- and getting kickbacks from -- favored buyers, according to the report by the Independent Inquiry Committee led by former U.S. Federal Reserve head Paul Volcker.
Controversial claim
Among those implicated was former Kremlin chief of staff Alexander Voloshin, now board chairman of the state electricity grid UES. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, in remarks reported by domestic news agencies, claimed some of the documents cited by the commission used forged signatures. And UES chief executive Anatoly Chubais said the commission knew Voloshin's signature was faked on oil contracts, adding: "I hope that those responsible for the mistake will be punished."
Volcker's team was extremely cautious on the claim against Voloshin. It noted that Iraqi Oil Ministry records reported about 4.3 million barrels were allocated in his name.
Yet it also acknowledged Russian claims that his signature was forged and said samples of his signatures were "not substantially similar" to the signature that appeared on a letter purportedly written by him.