On Tuesday, June 17, the Verkhovna Rada plans to consider in the second reading draft law No. 12374-d on reforming the Asset Recovery and Management Agency. This vote may be a turning point not only for rebooting the entire asset management system, but also for fulfilling the marker of the Ukraine Facility Plan financial support program, UNN writes.
Details
The draft law proposes a comprehensive update of the system, including:
- standardizes asset identification procedures;
- improves the management of various types of assets;
- increases the transparency of ARMA's work;
- unblocks the management of corporate rights of companies associated with the aggressor state;
- regulates the issue of seized sanctioned assets.
In addition, the document provides for a transparent audit of ARMA's work, new rules for the election and dismissal of the agency's head, and introduces a clear asset management mechanism. This draft law should not only restore confidence in the institution, which is designed to protect state interests, but is also an important tool for Ukraine to fulfill its obligations under the Ukraine Facility Plan financial support program.
Against the background of the latest high-profile scandals surrounding ARMA's decisions - from transferring assets to people associated with former owners, to a tender for a car for almost 3 million hryvnias - public demand for a change in approaches to the management of seized property is only growing.
This draft law has been supported by both the relevant anti-corruption committee, public activists, and international partners.
It is actively not supported only by the head of the Asset Recovery and Management Agency, Olena Duma. In her opinion, the document "contains politically motivated norms" and "may harm the entire anti-corruption infrastructure." At the same time, she herself calls her work in ARMA a "real breakthrough."
Will there be enough votes in the VR session hall to make the asset management system effective, transparent and accountable to society? There is hope, because the state during a full-scale war cannot afford to maintain an agency that has lost credibility.