The Asset Recovery and Management Agency demonstrates contempt for court decisions when they do not meet the interests of its leadership. A telling example is the case of the former head of the Central Interregional Territorial Administration, Vladyslav Romanov. However, the agency not only did not implement this decision, but also took steps to delay it. This is evidenced by the ARMA response to the request, which is available to UNN.
Details
In February 2025, the Kyiv District Administrative Court recognized Romanov's dismissal as illegal and ordered ARMA to reinstate him. But this decision was never implemented.
In its response, the agency confirmed that it was familiar with the relevant court decision to cancel ARMA's order of November 6, 2023, on the dismissal of Romanov; his reinstatement as the head of the Central Interregional Territorial Administration from November 7, 2023; and the recovery of compensation for forced absence in the amount of more than 778 thousand hryvnias in his favor.
However, in April 2025, instead of executing the court decision and reinstating Romanov, ARMA filed a motion with the court to clarify the decision, as well as appeals, which actually blocked the execution of the court order.
ARMA's behavior in this case is not just a legal conflict. It is a symptom of a systemic attitude to the law, in which the main priority is maintaining personal control, not complying with the rule of law.
This situation is another confirmation that under the guise of anti-corruption rhetoric, ARMA, under the leadership of Olena Duma, is actually sabotaging the rule of law.
Let us remind you
It recently became known that ARMA employees were notified of suspicion of unauthorized dissemination of information with limited access. We are talking about data on the search warrant in the premises of the territorial administration. According to the investigation, the official, having learned about the investigative actions, informed the management.
Experts in comments to UNN noted that territorial departments do not have the authority to work with such a register without the consent of the central apparatus, so access to the suspected employee was probably granted intentionally. In addition, they emphasized that ARMA has a centralized management vertical. Therefore, the instruction of "monitoring the judicial register" probably operates within the central apparatus, and the deputy heads of ARMA pass it on to the regions, where the heads involve "their people" for quick access to information.