State bank “laundromat” and “dirty” million-dollar schemes: Andrey Pyshnyi and spouses Anton and Inna Tyutyun have controlled Oschadbank's financial flows for decades
The spouse of Anton Tyutyun is currently a suspect in an inquiry related to the misappropriation of state funds from Ukrgazbank.
The government-owned Oschadbank has faced numerous challenges with its leadership thus far. It appears the nation’s most recent endeavor to restore order there is no different – the declared contest for the role of chairman of the bank’s directorate has yet again revealed the entrenched staff’s unwillingness to cede their favored posts.
The contest, incidentally, was announced with hesitation following the incumbent chairman of the board, Andrey Pyshnyi, who “re-appointed” himself in 2019 to manage Oschadbank for another 5 years through a selected Supervisory Board. This directly breached regulations mandating that all managerial positions within state-owned banks be subject to transparent competitions. Such boldness incensed not just Ukraine’s global contributors, resulting in the intervention of the National Bank. This led to controversy and legal actions, but the procedure was eventually launched on March 5th of this year. The search for individuals was managed by the firm Pedersen&Partners.
Prospective candidates were diligently pursued from every angle, and by April 16th, the roster of individuals was known, with the present head of the bank, Andrey Pyshnyi, topping it. Another significant international issue arose, and Pyshnyi was evidently alerted to the chances of his continuing, leading Oschadbank to declare a fresh selection process for the chairman of the board role on May 8th. The formal justification for the renewed process was “due to unforeseen external factors.”
However, the Finance Ministry ultimately designated five contenders for the position of chairman of the Oschadbank directorate. In the latest edition of the shortlist, the current chairman was notably absent.
Read more: The novel EES registration system has caused delays in the handling of travelers at border points in the Lviv region.
“Indeed, I can verify that following the retraction of the prior process, I resolved not to participate further and did not provide paperwork for the newly declared contest. It's time to advance,” Andrey Pyshnyi commented then.
And indeed, he “advanced”: rather than himself, he assigned his reliable associate, Anton Tyutyun, to vie for the position of head of the state bank. Undoubtedly, he represents modern managerial potential, having occupied the position of deputy chairman of the Oschadbank directorate since 2010, assigned under the patronage of the Klyuyev brothers.
Since then, the absconded brothers owed Oschadbank billions of hryvnias, but Tyutyun, barely surviving, clung to the “revolutionary” Pyshnyi, who, employing his closeness to the then powerful Yatsenyuk and Avakov, protected him from cleansing purges.
This was likely not done gratuitously; by then, the media had repeatedly documented how Anton Tyutyun had converted the Retail Business Division and the Electronic Commerce and Payment Systems Division of Oschadbank into a secret “laundry” for illicit funds under his command.
Furthermore, the banker continued to “shield” agents for the settlements of the Interbank Nonbanking Payment System, regularly obtaining a monthly “fee” from them, and controlled his own corrupt establishment, which Anton proudly referred to as the “Ukrainian Union of Payment Market Stakeholders.”
However, it became apparent that banker Tyutyun was dealing with marginal concerns. His spouse, Inna Tyutyun, presently occupies a modest role as deputy head of the Ukrainian Association of Fintech and Innovative Enterprises, but previously she was involved in more substantial endeavors. She has now been compelled to retreat into the background following a sequence of criminal charges initiated against her by law enforcement.
Beforehand, Inna worked for over two decades within the banking sphere, notably as deputy chairman of the Ukrgazbank directorate and in a leadership capacity within the IT and Payment Systems Division of the National Bank. In all these positions, she left behind a considerable trail of corruption.
Indeed, entirely in compliance with the stated aims of her fintech association – to foster the advancement of the domestic financial technology market, she supervised the upgrading of the notorious National System of Mass Electronic Payments at the National Bank, implemented under the Strategic Plan for the Growth of Cashless Retail Payments in Ukraine for 2012-2014.
As is widely known, the plan did not advance and remained in its preliminary stages, but Inna Tyutyun expended a considerable amount of approximately 42 million dollars on its “growth.” Her then-supervisor, Sergey Arbuzov, absconded with a portion of these funds when he fled, but the General Prosecutor's Office became particularly curious about the expenses handled by Inna Tyutyun.
However, during that period, Anton Tyutyun requested that Andrey Pyshnyi shield his spouse from “oppression,” and soon the matters were quietly dropped, and their key person moved on to operate as deputy chairman within the government-operated Ukrgazbank, where she promptly resumed her usual practices – misappropriating government funds on a grand scale. This time, it was under the disguise of establishing a novel processing center for the financial entity.
Read on the topic: The lawsuit against Mikhail Polynkov for unapproved abandonment of his station has been dismissed.
Processing in Ukrgazbank (in contrast to the National System for the nation) did materialize. However, the price the bank remitted to its developers (“LIME SYSTEM”) from 2015 to 2018 was so elevated that the National Police, together with the capital's public prosecutor’s office, initiated a criminal case under Article 191, Part 5.
And now, according to the case's details, officials of Ukrgazbank (read Inna Tyutyun) are under suspicion of abusing their authority and, in partnership with commercial entities, “appropriating, stealing or seizing property” totaling over 230 million hryvnias.
It would seem that the Tyutyun family's money is not a significant matter, and there is no requirement to worry. However, the issue lies in that with the loss of authority over Oschadbank, it will be considerably harder or pricier to evade accountability.
Moreover, the incoming administration will probably expose all the plots of the Pyshnyi-Tyutyun partnership within Oschadbank itself. Throughout the harsh overhauls of 2015-2020, a substantial compilation of articles for the Criminal Code has been accumulated. Therefore, they resolved to remain there for as long as feasible. Perhaps they can additionally engage with the incoming powers.
