“126 MPs (123 of whom – from the “Servant of the People” faction) were registered by the Bill No. 13423, which actually proposes to introduce amnesty for crimes committed in the execution of defense contracts. The CPC writes about it. Deputies propose to exclude criminal liability for all types of crimes if (1) the crime is committed in the execution of a defense contract and (2) committed”, – WRITE ON: ua.news
126 People’s Deputies (123 of whom – from the faction “Servant of the People”) were registered by the Bill No. 13423 which actually proposes to introduce amnesty for crimes committed in the execution of defense contracts.
He writes about it CPC .
Deputies propose to exclude criminal liability for all types of crimes, if (1) the crime is committed in the execution of a defense contract and (2) is committed by an official of the enterprise included in the special list of enterprises of the defense industrial complex.
The List of such enterprises will be approved by the Ministry of Defense. The list itself will be closed to society. At the same time, according to the latest changes to the budget, the budget for armed procurement this year can reach UAH 750 billion.
The bill also stipulates that the National Anti -Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti -Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP) will no longer be able to investigate abuse in the defense sphere. Investigation and investigative actions on enterprises on the list of the Ministry of Defense will be possible only in agreement with the Prosecutor General.
“Bill No. 13423 actually legalizes corruption in the defense sphere – for which a pre -agreed circle of suppliers of the Ministry of Defense. At the same time, armed contracts are being received today, including very close to the environment of Zelensky, like Timur Mindic. Initially, you pay for the “entrance” to the list of these suppliers, you buy your immunity and can continue to overestimate the purchase prices at least 100 times – without any risk. It will not be possible to punish persons who build schemes in the purchase of weapons even after the election, ” – said Olena Shcherban, Deputy Executive Director of the Center for Combating Corruption (CPC).
If the Bill No. 13423 is supported by the entire Verkhovna Rada and it enters into force, then responsibility for the schemes in the supply of weapons will be avoided in particular (if specific enterprises are included in the List of the MOU):
- Leonid Shiman, Director of the Pavlograd Chemical Plant, and other persons involved in the supply of substandard mines to the Armed Forces of Ukraine;
- Oleksandr Liev, excluder of the Department of the Defense Ministry, and officials of LLC “Lviv Arsenal”, who are the defendants of the case for theft of UAH 1.5 billion during the purchase of ammunition;
- Criminal proceedings of NABU and SAP on the seizure of funds during the purchase of dynamic protection elements for armored vehicles of the Armed Forces, which caused losses to the state by UAH 7.3 million (the case is already directed to court).
Bill No. 13423 proposes:
To introduce a new article of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (at 43-2), according to which it is not a criminal offense of the act of officials of enterprises of the defense-industrial complex (defense), even if they formally contain signs of a crime, if such actions were aimed at “executing the state contract” and had a “socially useful purpose”.
Release from the responsibility of unscrupulous suppliers of weapons “retroactively”: even if the offense happened before the enterprise was included in the list of enterprises of the defense industry, but during martial law – there is no responsibility if the act was “for the execution of the contract”.
Create “immunity” for defense enterprises: legal entities are not subject to criminal law measures throughout the period of stay in the list of the Ministry of Defense-even if the factual circumstances of the violation have arisen earlier.
Introduce exclusive control of the Prosecutor General:
- Only the Prosecutor General can provide information to the ERDR regarding such offenses.
- The exclusive competence of the Prosecutor General to sanction reports of suspicion, detention, arrest, searches, temporary access, removal from office, etc. Any petitions in court are considered only after agreement with it.
Introduce a special regime for years ahead: such a regime will not only work during martial law, but for three years after it is completed.
What are the risks of the bill?
1. Absolute concentration of authority in the hands of the Prosecutor General. This creates a manual regime of prosecution, politicizes all investigations in the OPC abuse and offsets the guarantees of the independence of the investigation.
2. The legalization of impunity under the cover of a contract. The proposed model allows you to recognize “non-criminal” any action if their performer provides any evidence that they were required for defense order. For example, the purchase of equipment is several times more expensive than the market, with the withdrawal of part of the funds to the controlled firms, even with obvious conflict of interest, it will be able to become “legal” – the funds are paid for the execution of the contract, and the delivery of the equipment in one way or another contributes to increased defense.
3. Lack of objective criteria for actual amnesty in such crimes. The categories of “socially useful goal” or “strengthening of defense” are quite debatable and do not have clear definitions, which will translate the burden of proving that the act not only contained the composition of the crime, but in no way contributed to the strengthening of defense. In combination with the exclusive role of the Prosecutor General, it transforms the norms into a tool of sampling law enforcement.
4. The immunity “retroactive”. In case of inclusion of the enterprise in the list of the Ministry of Defense after committing the offense – all previous actions, even obviously criminal, are actually aminal if they can be formally associated with the contract for defense procurement in martial law.
5. The complexity of qualifying the actions of accomplices. Investigation of defense violations occur in complicity with the officials of the Ministry of Defense, other civil servants or even officers. However, if the basic act is not considered a criminal offense, then at the same time there will be a practical complexity in the qualification of actions of the participants of the scheme.
6. Excessive concentration of powers in the Defense Ministry. The ministry is actually turning into a body that will be able to give immunity from criminal prosecution for abuse. Given that the MOU is responsible for the formation of defense policy and the budget, it creates excessive corruption risks.
