There is plenty of corruption everywhere in Russia. There is no point in trying to find saints or sinners in the story. Rather one should recognize the hypocrisy of kettle calling a pot black.
He seems to be alleging that the author of this piece is potentially responsible for as much misery and destruction as the people who killed the lawyer in the story, and that this undermines the moral legitimacy of the article.
Whether osipov himself condones what happened is completely irrelevant.
If everyone is doing it, why does the hypocrisy matter?
There also seems to be a lot of presumptive sorting into binary opposition; osipov disliking the author of the article doesn't mean he supports the "other side", and my objection above doesn't mean I agree with osipov (in fact I don't, though it sounded like you and rbanffy assumed I did).
I would also add the corruption of the 90's benefited some of the same government officials that ate being accused here.