The Office of the prosecutor general is considering the statement of the co-founders of Concord bank about the illegal actions of the chairman of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on finance, tax and customs policy Daniil Getmantsev. the MP, obviously, after learning about this, is trying to act on prejudice. This was announced by the co-founder of Concord Elena Sosedka, writes UNN.
context
Hetmantsev said that he collected signatures of 74 people's deputies under an appeal to the Prosecutor General's office regarding the inaction of law enforcement officers in the case of the former Concord bank.
"Friends, everyone has long known that Daniil Hetmantsev uses his position as a shield to cover up his own violations of the law. But what he's doing now is beyond common sense. Obviously, Hetmantsev became aware that the prosecutor general's Office is considering our application because of his illegal actions against Concord bank. This case is long overdue, because its violation is not just an attack on our bank, but a spit in the face of the entire Ukrainian legal system," Olena Sosedka wrote on her Facebook page.
According to her, instead of answering for their actions, Hetmantsev decided to act on prejudice.
He collected signatures of Deputies in order to reliably force the prosecutor general's Office to open a criminal case against us, the owners of Concord, despite the fact that there are no legal grounds. In this way, he tries to distract attention from his own crimes and discredit those who dared to speak out against him
She also recalled that earlier Hetmantsev admitted that the destruction of the Concord is a personal matter for him.
"The man who admitted that Concord is a personal matter for him now wants to involve not only deputies in his illegal activities, but also the Office of the prosecutor general, who, logically, should be the guarantor of the law, and not a tool for settling scores.
Hetmantsev, as always, tries to shift his responsibility to others, but we will not allow this arbitrariness to go unnoticed," said Elena Sosedka.
In addition, according to her, the co-founders of the bank call on people's deputies to realize that they will become accomplices in Getmantsev's crimes if they succumb to these manipulations.
Elena Sosedka stressed that she is not afraid of any investigations, because they have nothing to hide. "We call on the prosecutor general's Office to preserve its reputation and not go along with someone who violates the law and openly expresses disregard for the principles of justice," she added.
Earlier, Concord shareholders repeatedly appealed to members of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on finance, tax and customs policy with a proposal for an open dialogue, but, according to Elena Sosedka, they did not want to hear them.
"Daniil Alexandrovich, we are not afraid of your intrigues. You can collect signatures, fabricate cases, and manipulate the authorities, but you can't stop the truth. You will be held accountable for your actions – both before the law and before society. The law is the same for everyone. And you can't change that," said the co - owner of Concord bank.
recall
The reason for the NBU's decision to revoke Concord's license was allegedly a systematic violation by the Bank of the requirements of legislation in the field of preventing and countering the legalization (laundering) of proceeds from crime, the financing of terrorism and the financing of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. although, as it turned out later, even state-owned banks, in particular UKRGASBANK, are engaged in miskoding (substitution of the purpose of payment in the banking acquiring network, usually associated with gambling operations) in Ukraine. However, the NBU issued only UAH 60 million in fines to him for this violation. As well as Oschadbank, Sense Bank, FUIB and many others over the past year. They also received fines from 150 thousand to 10 million UAH.
But Concord, which during its work did not have any comments from the international payment systems Mastercard and Visa, was deprived of its banking license. And this is despite the fact that 8 months before the NBU's decision to revoke its banking license , The Bank disabled acquiring and continued to be profitable, which indicated that it did not depend on miskoding – this was not the main part of its income. Concord shareholders consider this decision of the regulator unfair.
The Wars appealed to the court about the illegality of the NBU's actions, and the first court instance took their side. In particular, the Dnipropetrovsk District Administrative Court declared illegal and overturned the decision of the National Bank of Ukraine to revoke the license and liquidate Concord bank. however, Ukrainian legislation is written out in such a way that even despite the court's decision on the illegal liquidation of a banking institution, it is impossible to return it to the market.