Ihor Fomenko, Head of the Federation of Employers "Defense", refuted accusations regarding draft law No. 13423 on the legal regime of Defense City. According to him, public comments by civic activists regarding the document indicate a free interpretation of its provisions and a misunderstanding of the specifics of the defense industry. This is stated in Fomenko's column for the military portal Defense Express, as reported by UNN.
Fomenko called biased the assertion that a full amnesty for crimes is proposed for those involved in defense procurement.
"Draft law No. 13423 does not propose 'full amnesty,' because the fact that an official of a Defense City resident committed a crime is not enough to be exempt from liability. Instead, a three-stage test (new Article 43-2 of the Criminal Code) is provided, which must be met simultaneously for an act not to be considered criminally unlawful. These are the conditions: the act is aimed at the proper execution of a state contract for defense procurement; the act was necessary to achieve a significant socially useful goal related to strengthening defense capabilities; the act did not create a threat to the lives of other people or a threat of environmental catastrophe," he pointed out.
According to him, only if these three conditions are met simultaneously will the act not be considered criminally unlawful. This safeguard will cut off cases related to the supply of low-quality goods, corruption crimes, inflated prices, etc.
Fomenko also emphasized that the project takes into account all public concerns.
In addition, he called untrue the assertion that Ministry of Defense officials would avoid responsibility for schemes in arms supply with the help of the new legal regime. According to Fomenko, the document does not mention civil servants. Therefore, they will not avoid responsibility for corruption under any circumstances.
According to him, the assertion about the amnesty of all offenses provided that the enterprise is included in the Ministry of Defense List also does not correspond to reality.
"The fact of including an enterprise in the List is not a basis for amnesty. Any act, including one committed before inclusion in the List, must meet the aforementioned three-stage test. It must be aimed at the proper execution of a defense contract, be necessary to strengthen defense capabilities, and not create threats. This was done deliberately so that cases about 'eggs for 17' would be investigated according to the usual procedure," Fomenko pointed out.
The head of the FRU association also called disinformation the thesis that NABU and SAP will not be able to investigate abuses in the defense sector. He pointed out that no provision of the document provides for the suspension of criminal proceedings. The only change is that certain procedural actions (detention, choosing a preventive measure, seizure of property, search, etc.) will require the approval of the Prosecutor General. At the same time, Fomenko stated that the proposed changes will not lead to an "absolute concentration" of powers in the hands of the Prosecutor General.