Funds from NABU cases go to Sternenko and Prytula funds instead of the budget: where the problem lies
13 November 17:30
ANALYSIS FROM 
The NABU and the SAPO transfer funds from agreements concluded by the investigation in criminal proceedings to certain charitable foundations. According to the SAPO, over the past three years, under agreements concluded by prosecutors, “about UAH 2.9 billion has been transferred to the needs of the Ukrainian Defense Forces.” However, in reality, these funds are not received by the Ministry of Defense or the Defence Intelligence of Ukraine, for example, but by foundations. As a rule, we are talking about the Sternenko Foundation and Serhiy Prytula’s Come Back Alive Foundation.
This practice has sparked a discussion among experts, according to [Komersant], which has talked to MPs and lawyers about this issue.
What politicians say
In particular, MP Georgii Mazurashu believes that the funds received by the SAP/NABU through agreements should be transferred directly to battalions or brigades where corruption risks are lower, and not turned into “political” ones.
In reality, it looks rather strange if suspects or persons whose guilt has been proven make a deal with the investigation, agree to transfer some money for the needs of the country and the Defense Forces, but at the same time these funds are directed to some “political funds” that not only support the Army, but also actively use it with an obvious political and electoral purpose,” Mazurash said in his commentary.
At the same time, MP Mariana Bezuhla, on the contrary, considers this approach of the NABU/SAPO acceptable.
“There are more chances that all the money will be used for defense in a meaningful way,” Bezuhla said, noting that “Ukraine has an independent anti-corruption structure to control the use of funds by the funds.
Legal opinion
Lawyer Oleg Shram comments on this topic through the prism of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and says that the relevant practice may even contain signs of the corruption crime of “abuse of power or official position.”
The CPC does not provide for such practices, and officials must act solely on the basis of the law,” explains the lawyer.
“The lawyer also calls the money from transactions that go to third parties an ‘unlawful benefit’.
I believe that this is an outright corruption scheme. Why? Because, in fact, suspects or accused persons in a veiled form give someone, no matter who, an undue benefit for the SAPO prosecutors to enter into a deal with them on favorable terms. These conditions are related to the fact that people do not fully compensate for the damage caused by corruption crimes, do not face the penalty of confiscation of all property, since most corruption crimes are punishable by confiscation of property, and do not avoid real punishment in the form of imprisonment. Since such payments to the funds are not provided for by the current legislation, they are illegal,” Shram said.
Lawyer and attorney Oleksandr Protas, in turn, emphasizes that NABU and SAPO are not, by law, managers of funds for carrying out certain economic activities. And the purchase of various drones, shells, mines, etc. is not within their competence.
They cannot make decisions about which drones to buy, or who to send the money to. They are like organizations that have to fight against the detection of corruption crimes. And when they make a single decision to send money to a certain fund, it will make any lawyer dealing with public procurement’s hair stand on end. How does it work? That is, bypassing any competitions, bypassing the very principles of competition that should be in place and that are envisaged, the money is given to some selected fund. And why this particular fund? Why not to some combat brigade directly, in order to prevent this money from being misused, in order to reduce the cost. After all, every foundation, including Sternenko’s, does not live by the Holy Spirit. They still spend money on their logistics and their internal needs. Absolutely all charitable foundations do this. Therefore, there should be competitions between foundations that come with their own programs, compete with each other to see who makes the best offer,” explains the lawyer and adds that this issue needs a thorough analysis.
He emphasizes that “anti-corruption agencies cannot interfere in business activities at all, and anti-corruption agencies cannot determine where to send money on their own. It is not their personal money.”
A prosecutor can send his salary wherever he sees fit. But the money that was received as a result of an agreement with the investigation and approved by the court is no longer the money of the SAPO prosecutor, it is not the money of the HACC, it is the money of the state. And it is the state that has to decide where to send it. But now we are talking about a private fund. But why not some other fund? Why isn’t there a transparent competition, which SAPO and NABU demand from everyone?” Protas emphasized.
As a reminder, it has recently become known that the SAPO and NABU transferred UAH 44 million to Sternenko’s charity fund, received as a result of plea agreements in the case of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine.
Read us on Telegram: important topics – without censorship
