Expert: “If Yanukovych’s associates are not punished, this means that the GPU cannot investigate obvious things”
The situation with the lifting of parliamentary immunity from Sergei Klyuev and Sergei Melnichuk is indicative. It testifies that we have not yet escaped the “Kuchma-Yanukovych system.” “Almost the entire “post-Maidan elite” is not, in fact, made up of new faces. These are our same former rulers, accustomed to games without rules, no one considers it shameful to “abandon each other,” said non-factional people’s deputy Boris Filatov in an interview with obozrevatel.com.
That is why we have such a result today with the holding of persons of the previous political regime to account for crimes during the Euromaidan. Or rather their absence. Yesterday, the Verkhovna Rada Regulations Committee, with great difficulty, recommended that the Chairman of Parliament, Volodymyr Groysman, introduce for consideration the issue of lifting the immunity of two deputies. Today, the deputies’ immunity was lifted.
However, the epic with the transfer of responsibility for lifting immunity from Klyuev and Melnichuk is already a signal from the past. How did it all happen? At noon, Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada Vladimir Groysman convened a meeting of the Coalition Council on this issue. “Parliament must exercise part of its powers to consider the issue and make a decision. And no one – I emphasize this – has the right to delay this process,” Groysman said.
After a short meeting, it was decided to submit the submission for re-verification by the Committee on Regulations and Organization of Work of the Verkhovna Rada. However, the Committee refused to consider the document again, since they are convinced that there are more than enough grounds for lifting parliamentary immunity from Sergei Klyuev. But acting Chairman of the Committee Pavel Pinzenik withdrew from consideration of the issue. According to him, Vladimir Groysmav should have submitted the document either for voting or back to the Prosecutor General’s Office for revision, but not back to the Committee.
What does this whole situation indicate? “I saw very unpleasant things,” non-factional people’s deputy Vitaliy KUPRIY commented to The Day (Read more about him in the article by Vitaly Kupriy. Kolomoisky’s mongrel received an order to eliminate Poroshenko). “We are shown entire schemes for theft of the state budget, but as a lawyer, one fact worries me: Klyuev did not do this alone, but attracted dozens and hundreds of people. But is at least one of them now behind bars? I believe that the prosecutor’s office is starting from the wrong place. It was necessary to bring suspicion to all those who participated in the theft, bring charges, transfer the case to court, choose a preventive measure, arrest. And then the people who are in custody would testify against the organizer of the scheme. This would be normal and understandable to the deputies and the regulations committee. According to my information, the GPU did not provide any evidence, so there is a game of giveaway, because by law the committee is obliged to check the validity and legality. If I were the Prosecutor General, I would have uncovered the entire scheme, investigated all the circumstances, brought all those involved to justice, and at the last stage, with unconditional evidence, I would have come to the deputies in the relevant committee on a proposal to lift immunity. There is some kind of game going on.”
But the game is very dangerous for our country. Why?
As Ukrainian media reported yesterday, citing Radio Liberty’s Brussels correspondent Ricard Jozwiak, the European Union plans to exclude the son of ex-president Viktor Yanukovych and three more of his associates from sanctions. “Sanctions against Tabachnik and Lukash have been extended for one year, against Sergei Klyuev – for 4 months. Viktor Yanukovych Jr. has been removed from the list,” the journalist wrote on Twitter. Let us remind you that at the end of the week the European Union must make another decision on extending sanctions against former Ukrainian officials from the circle of ex-President Viktor Yanukovych.
“INTERPOL DID NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE”
Obviously, the Prosecutor General’s Office needs to try harder this time to present evidence of the crimes of persons on the reorganization list. After all, last time, on March 6, the European Union lifted sanctions against former deputy head of the Presidential Administration Andrei Portnov, former heads of the SBU Alexander Yakimenko and Igor Kalinin, as well as the son of the former prime minister, Alexei Azarov. As the facts show, the information collected was not even enough for Interpol to put them on the wanted list.
As the head of the Ukrainian bureau of Interpol Vasily Nevolya explained in an interview with one of the domestic media, the Ukrainian bureau received the task of conducting a search for former leaders – ex-Prime Minister Mykola Azarov, ex-Prosecutor General Viktor Pshonka, ex-Head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs Vitaly Zakharchenko, ex-Deputy Minister Internal Affairs Sergei Ratushnyak and other officials. “We sent the materials to the legal office of the General Secretariat of Interpol, they carried out examinations for a long time and came to the conclusion that all these individuals, including the ex-commander of the Berkut special company Dmitry Sadovnik, would be put on the wanted list using the channels and mechanisms of Interpol contradict the rules of Art. 3 charters,” Nevolya said.
He recalled that the basic principle of Interpol’s activities is adherence to the principle of neutrality, that is, the organization is prohibited from any interference in matters of a political, military, racial and religious nature. “Comparing the nature and content of the suspicions raised against all ex-officials in the Maidan cases with the provisions of Art. 3 and 2 of the Interpol charter, experts concluded that one way or another these events are related to the change in the political situation in the country,” he explained. Of course, Nevolya assured, Interpol understands the importance of bringing the perpetrators to justice, but cannot do anything if they have not been given grounds to call this or that person a criminal.
At the same time, Nevolya noted that the Ukrainian bureau knows about the location of former officials. “Mostly all of them are either in the Russian Federation (*country sponsor of terrorism) or in the temporarily occupied territory of Ukraine, which is under Russian control,” he said.
“The GPU WANTS TO DEPRIVE THE IMMUNITY OF FORMER OFFICIALS”
Therefore, the question remains for the Ukrainian authorities: why, in fact, after a year of work, the Prosecutor General’s Office has not been able to prove the criminality of the actions of Yanukovych and his associates?
The Prosecutor General’s Office itself promises to bring all cases to an end. As Pavel Zhebrivsky, head of the Prosecutor General’s Office for investigating corruption crimes, said, the removal of Klyuev’s assets from the country “will be prevented.” “Unfortunately, today the prosecutor’s office is limited in its powers, because there is parliamentary immunity, and it cannot declare suspicion either on Mr. Klyuev or on other persons involved, against whom a proposal has been made to remove parliamentary immunity. But in principle, I think that we will work on their property so that they will not be able to withdraw this property until either the Verkhovna Rada makes a decision or the Constitutional Court lifts parliamentary immunity,” he said.
“SECURITY DEPARTMENTS SHOULD NOT PARTICIPATE IN POLITICAL GAMES”
“As far as I know, the possibility of lifting sanctions against Viktor Yanukovych Jr., Elena Lukash, Dmitry Tabachnyk and Sergei Klyuev has been discussed on the sidelines of the EU and with senior government officials of Ukraine since March. The EU made it clear that if there is no announcement of suspicion against them, sanctions will be lifted,” says Daria KALENYUK, executive director of the Anti-Corruption Center (ACC).
So, yesterday, public activists gathered outside the walls of the Verkhovna Rada to “stimulate” deputies to lift the immunity from Sergei Klyuev. “If we want to return Sergei Klyuev’s assets located abroad and in Ukraine, then this should have been done yesterday. As for Viktor Yanukovych Jr., there is a big risk that the sanctions will be lifted. The first reason for this is that there were no in-depth investigations or criminal proceedings regarding him (specifically for crimes related to the theft of state property). In addition, there are doubts whether the death of Viktor Viktorich is an imitation. This situation prompted the EU to lift sanctions against Viktor Viktorovich Yanukovych,” says Daria Kalenyuk.
If the former officials are nevertheless released from sanctions, this will mean that the Prosecutor General’s Office is underperforming in its investigation of individuals who abused their official position and stole state property. “All this suggests that there is a collapse of the law enforcement system in Ukraine. We need to completely restructure and reform the prosecutor’s office, give time to create the National Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office. Politicians need to stop influencing law enforcement. The leadership of the prosecutor’s office and other law enforcement agencies should not take part in various political games and corruption schemes. We need an independent and impartial law enforcement system. This, of course, will take years, but the cases we are talking about (about Klyuev and Zakharchenko) are very indicative. They also say that the Prosecutor General’s Office cannot investigate obvious things. Cases are somehow being investigated solely under pressure from public activists, the media and the EU,” adds the executive director of the Anti-Corruption Center.
“In my opinion, the Ukrainian authorities have a reasoned approach to bringing charges against former officials, because the quick enrichment of civil servants has no legal basis. These funds may be considered to have been obtained illegally. Another question is how exactly the Ukrainian authorities prove these circumstances, because they actually ignore this evidence. After the accusation, the case does not develop further,” says Rostislav KRAVETS, senior partner of the law firm Kravets and Partners. He recalls that for more than a year there has been almost no progress in the case of the Heavenly Hundred and in the indictment of former government employees who embezzled public funds. “All this means that Ukraine is only trying to fight corruption on paper, but in reality there are no real steps to return stolen funds to Ukraine. Nobody is looking for people accused of these crimes,” says Rostislav Kravets.
“In our country there is an institution of conviction in absentia – anyone can be referred to the court and tried in his absence in the courtroom,” emphasizes Vitaly Kupriy. “You can make such a decision, use the special confiscation regime, and this will be a justification for European countries not only not to lift sanctions, but also to transfer the seized property to Ukraine. And here the “negotiation” is pure.”
Ivan KAPSAMUN, Natalia BILOUSOVA, Maria YUZYCH, “Day”