Instead of effectively managing seized assets, the head of the Asset Recovery and Management Agency (ARMA), Olena Duma, appears to be engaging in populism and continues to use sensitive topics for her own PR. Her recent statements, in particular about the alleged ties between businessman Viktor Polishchuk and the Kremlin, have caused a wide response and led to a lawsuit being filed against her. Without any evidence, these statements give the impression of manipulating public opinion in the context of the war with Russia, UNN writes.
Recently, a press conference was held at which the Duma publicly stated that Ukrainian businessman, owner of the Gulliver shopping and business center, Viktor Polishchuk, and his wife have "close relations with the Kremlin elite." However, the Head of the ARMA did not provide any evidence or supporting documents. In response to this statement, Polishchuk filed a lawsuit to protect his honor, dignity and business reputation. In a comment to UNN, the businessman emphasized that the information voiced by the Duma was invented and untrue.
"The information about ties with the Kremlin elite is not only made up, it also negatively affects my business reputation and the business reputation of my wife," said Polishchuk.
The businessman's lawyers added in a comment to UNN that Olena Duma did not just report false information about Viktor Polishchuk and his wife Lilia Rizva, but emphasized this information during her speech.
"Before presenting this information, the head of the ARMA, Olena Duma, does not just present factual statements, but emphasizes them with the words 'I have to say, by the way, that...', thus deliberately focusing the listener's interest on this information," the lawyer said.
In the context of a full-scale invasion, the topic of Russian influence is very sensitive for Ukrainian society, and therefore any mention of Ukrainian entrepreneurs in the context of ties with the enemy causes a wide resonance. Lawyer Serhiy Lysenko does not rule out that the Duma decided to promote itself on the name of the owner of Gulliver.
"Given the public event at which the Duma actually disseminated the information, it is likely that the purpose of this was to develop a public discussion on the topic under discussion," Lysenko told UNN.
The lawyer noted that when considering cases of this category, the courts determine the nature of such information and find out whether it is a factual statement (understood clearly, unambiguously and does not require additional explanation) or a value judgment (subjective judgment, criticism, statements that do not contain factual data). In the second case, the claim is dismissed, since value judgments are not subject to refutation and proof of their truthfulness. Factual statements should be divided into true statements, i.e. those that correspond to reality, and false statements. Only false statements can be refuted.
"In this dispute, the court must decide whether the information is negative and damaging, in particular, to business reputation, creating negative impressions of the plaintiff among an indefinite number of people," Lysenko explained.
It is worth noting that this is not the first time the Duma has tried to use sensitive topics for its own PR. One of the most striking examples is the situation with the yacht of Viktor Medvedchuk, a pro-Russian ex-MP accused of treason.
The head of the ARMA mentioned the 92-meter yacht Royal Romance, owned by Medvedchuk, in almost every public speech and emphasizedthat ARMA employees are doing "titanic work" to realize this asset.
The head of the ARMA even complained about Medvedchuk's "resistance" to the agency's efforts to sell his asset. It can be assumed that the traitor's lawyers may indeed have tried to influence the situation with the seizure of the yacht in Croatia, but can this be an excuse for ARMA to allow Ukraine to be one step away from losing one of the most expensive seized assets of the ex-MP suspected of treason. After all, the District Court of Split canceled the arrest of Medvedchuk's yacht.
The Office of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine noted that throughout the entire period of arrest, efforts were made to develop mechanisms that would allow ARMA to sell the property located abroad.
"In particular, the Prosecutor General's Office, together with the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, drafted amendments to the relevant regulations in May 2023. However, the new leadership of the ARMA allowed delays in this process. The ARMA was unable to reach a consolidated position on these changes by November 2023, and the final decision was made only in February 2024. That is, three months before the expiration of the maximum possible period of seizure of the yacht under Croatian law. It was only on March 20, 2024, almost 2 years after the arrest, that ARMA began the procedure for the sale of the yacht," the PGO said in .
Royal Romance is estimated at $200 million, or almost UAH 8.5 billion at the current NBU exchange rate. Needless to say, the government is currently planning a radical tax increase to close the budget gap?
So the question arises: Is the Duma ready to work for the good of the state and replenish the Ukrainian budget, or is it only interested in PR and manipulation?