BURNING ANTI-CORRUPTION NEWS / Issue #10
July, 9, 2017

AntAC Representative Meets the US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson

New International Relations Expert Joins AntAC

Daria Kaleniuk: Poroshenko needs to give up control of law enforcement, judiciary. Read more messages from the meeting here.

Anticorruption action center is happy to announce that Mrs. Olena Halushka will manage  AntAC international relations department.

The President Initiated a Draft Law to Abolish Asset Declarations for Anticorruption Activists

The respected draft law was submitted to the parliament by President Poroshenko on July 8, however, its final content is unavailable yet.

The draft law was developed by Presidential administration without consultations with NGO community.

Representatives of some NGOs, including AntAC, were invited to the Presidential Administration on Friday evening July 7, where President Poroshenko first presented the legislative proposals to the activists. While Presidential Administration conducted consultations regarding the draft law with foreign donors and partners well in advance, NGOs did not have opportunity to prepare their feedback on time.

On Saturday morning, July 8, ANTAC provided Presidential Administration with suggestions to the draft, but did not receive any feedback regarding their consideration or non-consideration.

AntAC’s key concerns regarding draft law presented by the President:

The draft law abolishes asset disclosure requirements for anticorruption activists, however, introduces another tools for authorities to pressure all NGOs in Ukraine by establishing additional mandatory tax reporting.

Specifically, the draft law requires

• NGOs obtaining foreign technical assistance and/or funded from the public funds to submit annual financial report to the tax service. The tax service is obliged to publish it. Failure of the publication of the report triggers sanction of waiving a non-profit status from the NGO.
• natural persons-private enterpreneurs to report quarterly to tax service on income received directly or indirectly  from foreign donors and on the  expenditure of such an income. For the failure to provide such a report the private enterpreneur can lose tax benefits. Private enterpreneurs are not able to differenciate private and enterpreneurial expenditures, therefore they  will have to report for all their private expences.

AntAC supports the idea of annual public financial reporting for all NGOs, however considers sanction for failure to report as too strict and vague giving a new tool for authorities to punish unfavorable NGOs. Finally,  provisions on extra reporting and sanctions for private enterpreneurs are discriminatory by nature, lead to publication of private information and provide an opportunity to pressure experts providing services to NGOs.

Smear Campaign on Akhmetov TV-Channel Against Anticorruption Activists and Experts Continues

On July 7, 2017 the national TV channel “Ukraina” released a second 30 minutes documentary film “Following the grant-eaters”.  

Specifically, the program covers Vitaliy Shabunin and Oleksandra Ustinova from AntAC, as well as Sergiy Leshchenko, Mustafa Nayem, Andriy Gerus (the independent energy expert, who heavily criticizes the government).

Independent media council already conducted assessment of the first edition of the  program “Following the grant-eaters” aired at the national TV channel “Ukraina” in spring this year.  The council concluded that in this program the TV channel violated the standards of accuracy, reliability and balance of information

AntAC submitted a law suit against “Ukraina” TV channel. The first court hearing in the case is scheduled for September 5, 2017.

AntAC considers the second edition of the program as continuation of a broad well-planned campaign aimed to discredit AntAC team members as well as other activists and pro-reform officials, who are criticizing the government. We have collected  facts of smear campaign against AntAC, named key accusations against our organization and provided officially our rebuttals to them.

NABU Auditor: Interviews with Candidates on July 12 and Voting in the Parliament on July 13

On July 12 at 3 pm the  Anticorruption Committee of the Parliament will conduct interviews with candidates for NABU auditor from the Parliament.

Yegor Sobolyev, the head of the anti-corruption committee invites all interested parties to attend the hearing. 

Among other candidates, Nigel Brown confirmed his presence for the date of interviews. Carlos Castresana and Martha Boersch, candidates supported by the civil society, will be interviewed via skype.

There is high likelihood that disregarding results of the interviews the majority of the committee will support candidacy of Oleksandra Yanovska, a human rights lawyer and a law professor.  

Mrs. Yanovska has never worked in law-enforcement bodies and does not have experience in investigation of corruption. Yanovska was a member of selection panel for NABU director, where she was appointed by the President, and did not support appointment of A. Sytnyk, current head of NABU. Yanovska is competing for the position of the Supreme Court judge and therefore is vulnerable for extra pressure.

There is high likelihood the  NABU auditor will be appointed by the Parliament on July 13, which is the last day of plenary session in the parliament before summer recess.

Prosecutor’s General Office and Special Anticorruption Prosecution Office filed requests to lift immunity from 5 MPs. During entire week the Parliamentary Committee on the Rules of Procedure was considering these requests, however managed to support  only one out of five. The final decision on lifting immunity should be taken by the parliament during its plenary session, which is expected in the upcoming week.

The Speaker of the Parliament has the authority to include all five requests  into the agenda of the Rada’s plenary for the next week.   

General observation of the committee hearings on this issue is that the committee exceeded its authority and demanded investigators and prosecutors to prove the guilt of MPs in the way it is necessary for the guilty verdict of the court. However, according to the law the Committee should only consider evidences for notification of suspicion and necessity in further investigation against members of the parliament.

Below is detailed information on each of the requests.  

A.Lozovoy
Faction of the Radical Party

The case of tax avoidance by A. Lozovoy was investigated by the PGO without either NABU or SAPO.

According to the PGO, Lozovoy failed to pay taxes from UAH 8,7 mln, which is the difference between his official earnings and hard cash and other property he declared.

The Committee ruled that the request  to lift immunity from Lozovoy is lawful, but not motivated enough.

O. Dovgiy
Faction of the “Volya Narody”

The case of abuse of power by O. Dovgiy while serving as Secretary of Kyiv City Council was investigated by the Prosecutor’s General Office together with SAPO.

According to the PGO, O. Dovgiy intentionally organized violation of the Rules of Procedure of Kyiv City Council to facilitate decision on allocation of land to one company. It is the first case when secretary of local council is being brought to liability for violation of the rules of procedure in the interests of third parties.   

The Committee ruled that the request to lift immunity from Dovgiy is lawful, but not motivated enough.

E. Deidei
Faction of the People’s Front

The case of illicit enrichment of E. Deidei was investigated by NABU, but decision to request lifting immunity on this stage has been taken by SAPO alone.

The investigation has evidences showing that Deidei has bought two luxury cars and an appartment, which cannot be justified by his official income, and attempted to justify enrichment through fictitious loan of USD 3,5 mln. The investigations possessed results of wiretapping of Mr. Lynchevskiy, who is said to borrow money to Deidei, which prove fictitious nature of the loan. However, Lynchevskiy, who is a member of the People’s Front as well as the head of the Committee Pavlo Pynzenyk, appeared in the committee and claimed that he had actually borrowed money to Deidei.

The Committee on the Rules of Procedure ruled that request is not motivated and recommended the Speaker to return the document to the PGO for further elaboration.

M.Poliakov
Faction of the People’s Front

The case of bribery regarding Poliakov was investigated by NABU in cooperation with FBI and with undercover agent involved.  

NABU requested the Parliament both to lift immunity from Poliakov and to give permission for his arrest and detention.

According to the investigation, Poliakov received a bribe of USD 7,5 thousands for lobbying  amendments to the law. NABU acquired evidence of bribing through wiretaping and undercover filming.    

Although respective evidence was presented to the members of the Committee, it ruled that the request is not motivated enough.

B. Rosenblat, faction of Poroshenko’s Block

The case of bribery regarding Mr. Rosenblat also was investigated by NABU and is closely linked to  the case of Poliakov. As in the case of Poliakov, NABU requested the Parliament not only to lift immunity from Poliakov, but also to give permission for his arrest and detention.

As the investigation showed, Rosenblat demanded, received and gave bribes for facilitating  illegal amber extraction for foreign company. Specifically, he extorted bribes for  amending the legislation to ensure legislative  priviledges for a certain company, receiving extraction licences and pressuring competing businesses through law-enforcement bodies. The evidence against Rosenblat includes undercover filming and testimonies of undercover agent.

During the Committe Hearing NABU and SAPO presented video recording of bribes taken by Mr. Rozenblat. Read the transcript here (in Ukrainian)

The Committee recommended the Parliament to lift immunity from B. Rosenblat and to give permission for his arrest and detention.

The decision to put respective requests regarding MPs for voting in the Parliament depends on the Speaker of the Parliament. It is expected that requests for lifting immunity will be considered in the Parliament on July 12.

In cases of Mr.Poliakov and Mr.Rosenblat, where NABU and SAPO request not only lifting immunity, but also permission for arrest and detention, the Parliament has to take three separate decisions by three separate votings regarding each of respective MPs. If the Parliament adopts positive decision only on lifting immunity, NABU will be able to  notify MPs of suspicion, however, will not be able to arrest and request detention warrant from the court. In this case MPs will have a legal opportunity to leave Ukraine.

Supreme Court Selection: Updates

The High Qualification Commission of Judges continues final consideration of candidates to the Supreme Court judges, who received negative opinions from the Public Integrity Council.  As of July 7th, overall result of all the plenary sessions of the Commission is:

27
candidates were disqualified based on the  negative opinions of the PIC

64
negative opinions of the PIC were overruled by the Commission

The Commission has considered 91 of 110 negative opinion of the Public integrity council.
The Commission overruled negative PIC opinion regarding acting head of the Supreme Court of Ukraine Y. Romaniuk.

Mr. Romaniuk is known for welcoming so called dictatorship laws, adopted by Yanukovych associates in the parliament on January 16th, 2014 to pressure participants of the Revolution of Dignity. He also took decision, which was later recognized by the European Court of Human Rights as severe violation of the European Human Rights Convention.

It is expected that the Qualification Commission of Judges will continue assessment of negative opinions of the Public Integrity Council by the end of July.