The DMS case and the SAP agreement: instead of 88 million, the state will be compensated only 800,000 hryvnia
6 March 14:41
Former prosecutor criticizes another SAP agreement due to its unprofitable terms for the state
The High Anti-Corruption Court approved a plea agreement between the prosecutor of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office and the former head of one of the departments of the State Migration Service in a case involving the embezzlement of UAH 88 million. According to Slovo i Dilo, the person in question is Volodymyr Vakalyuk. Under the terms of the agreement, the defendant will reimburse one hundredth of the damages caused and will provide truthful testimony, according to
The court also decided to release the official from serving the main sentence with probation and set a probation period of three years.
“Under the terms of the plea agreement, the person in question must partially compensate the State Medical Service for the damages caused by his criminal offense in the amount of UAH 805,200,” the High Anti-Corruption Court said.
According to former SAPO prosecutor Stanislav Bronevitsky, this ratio of compensation for damages to losses incurred is disproportionate, as UAH 88 million will never reach the budget.
“To arrive at the first request is nonsense. And thirdly, he has to compensate for the damage – 800 thousand hryvnias. 88 million – 800 thousand hryvnias. 88 million – 800 thousand hryvnias. And who will compensate for the rest? It seems to me that in this case, it is disproportionate to involve the defendant,” says Bronevitsky.
In addition, he considers the rest of the requirements of this agreement to be very conditional.
“The prosecution says he is an accomplice. 88 million, just a second. According to the terms of the agreement – I am reading the terms of the agreement – he must: cooperate with the prosecutor in exposing the illegal activities of other persons; cooperation will consist of the defendant agreeing to provide the court with truthful testimony as set out in the indictment. That’s good. But what does it mean to commit to providing truthful testimony regarding the circumstances set out in the indictment? What if he starts telling lies and saying that they are the truth, how can this be verified?” explains Stanislav Bronevitsky.
READ ALSO: A year of the “Kaufman deal”: how Odessa lost its airport for the second time
The former prosecutor also noted that after reports of the exposure of this scheme, neither the NABU nor the SAP published any information about its further investigation. According to Bronevitsky, it is already an established practice of anti-corruption structures that most of their public statements end in silence, and cases are forgotten over time.
“A striking example is the Midas case. They went public, shouted ‘we have defeated the system’, and then it turns out that no system has been defeated. The kickbacks remained as they were. And then the head of the Bureau comes out and says, ‘Whoever gave bribes, whoever paid whom, come yourselves. This means that they have nothing,” notes Bronevitsky, adding that often the result of such an approach is only a change of people in certain positions.
“So what is the point of this publicity? Where were you rushing to? Why did you do it? And what did you achieve? Nothing good. We now have publicity – a victory. And then silence and calm. And no one understands or knows what is going on in this case,” he concludes.
Earlier, former SAPO prosecutor Stanislav Bronevitsky said in an interview with the YouTube channel
