The defense of former official of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine Oleksandr Liev suggests that the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office has transferred the case of non-delivery of mines under the contract between the Ministry of Defense and Lviv Arsenal back to the Prosecutor General's Office because it sees no prospects in it. This was stated by lawyer Nazar Kulchytsky in an exclusive comment to UNN.
Details
On March 15, the High Anti-Corruption Court changed the measure of restraint for Oleksandr Liev from custody with the possibility of posting UAH 50 million bail to personal obligation due to the absence of a crime in his actions when signing the contract for the supply of ammunition.
The hearing started at 15:00, but only the former official's lawyers showed up, the prosecutors did not come to court, and Liev himself was not brought from the pre-trial detention center. Therefore, the investigating judge of the HACC adjourned the hearing to 18:30 for the prosecutors to appear in court. However, no one else came to the hearing, although there are 13 prosecutors in the group. They also failed to organize a video conference between Liiev and the court because the power was allegedly cut off in the pre-trial detention center. During the meeting, it also became known that the SAPO had transferred the case back to the PGO.
We do not understand (why NABU and SAPO transferred the case - ed.). I don't know why they decided to give this case to the PGO again, I have an assumption that they don't see any prospects in this case and that's why they decided to get rid of it
He also noted that the prosecutors did not appear at the trial, although Liiev's lawyers notified them and handed them all the documents on March 13.
We do not know why the prosecutors did not appear. We notified the Office of the Prosecutor General, the Prosecutor General's Office, the SAPO prosecutor, that is, we notified all possible prosecutors and provided copies of documents... At about 6:00 p.m., the Prosecutor General's Office wrote that he did not know about this case, was not prepared and asked to postpone it to another time. But we provided the court with evidence that we had notified him on March 13. Accordingly, they had enough time and had to appear in court, but they ignored it. The court summoned them twice and they ignored them twice
The lawyer also told what new evidence was presented at the court hearing on March 15.
We have obtained documents submitted by SEVOTECH to the Ministry of Defense, which show that SEVOTECH had a direct contract with the manufacturer for the supply of mines. Because certain procedures and timeframes were not followed, this contract was not fulfilled. They then offered alternative supplies from third countries and SEVOTECH also provided evidence that they were licensed. In addition, SEVOTECH claims that some of the mines are ready and they are ready to deliver the full amount of mines for which they were paid
Recall
On January 27, the Security Service of Ukraine detained Oleksandr Liev in the case of signing a contract between the Ministry of Defense and Lviv Arsenal for the supply of ammunition. A few days later, on January 30, the High Anti-Corruption Court rejected the prosecution's motion and refused to impose any preventive measure on Liev.
Prosecutors appealed the decision, and on February 12, the Appeals Chamber of the High Anti-Corruption Court imposed a preventive measure on Liiev in the form of arrest for two months until April 8, 2024, with the possibility of posting UAH 50 million bail. The former head of the Department of Military and Technical Policy, Development of Armaments and Military Equipment of the Ministry of Defense said that he believed the court's decision was unlawful.
UNN decided to look into this case and restore the chronology.