The criminal proceedings against the former acting head of the Defense Ministry's Military Technical Policy Department, Oleksandr Liev, continue to raise questions. This is a case concerning the supply of 200 defective DShKM 12.7 x 108 machine guns to the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
In this criminal proceeding, Oleksandr Liev is charged with embezzlement of property and obstructing the lawful activities of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. However, Liev himself did not sign the contract for the supply of machine guns, did not pay for them, and could not refuse to accept the weapons, as their quality was confirmed by the military. UNN decided to look into the details of the case and find out what the accusations were based on.
In mid-January, the Office of the Prosecutor General reported that a former MoD official and two heads of a state-owned enterprise were served with suspicion notices of misappropriation and embezzlement of property, and obstruction of the lawful activities of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (Article 191(5), Article 114-1(2) of the Criminal Code). In addition, the heads of the state-owned enterprise were also notified of suspicion of forgery (part 2 of Article 366 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine).
According to the prosecution, in 2022, the Department of the Ministry of Defense signed contracts with the state-owned enterprise for the supply of 400 DShK machine guns for a total of UAH 193 million. However, the state enterprise delivered only 200 large-caliber machine guns, some of which were of poor quality.
Everything sounds quite clear and logical if you don't go into details. Let's take a closer look at the chronology of events.
In March 2022, the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine signed a contract for the supply of 400 DShK 12.7 x 108 mm machine guns and 26 KPVT 14.5 mm machine guns. At that time, Vladyslav Shostak was the director of the MoD's Department of Military and Technical Policy, and he signed the contract for the supply of these weapons. A few days later, the Ministry of Defense, represented by the same head of the Department, Vladyslav Shostak, made a 97% prepayment for the contract.
In May 2022, the first 200 DShKM machine guns and 26 KPVT machine guns were delivered. However, due to the lack of forms, the military unit refused to accept them for permanent storage. Instead, they were accepted for temporary storage so that the supplier could obtain the necessary documents.
In August 2022, Oleksandr Liev was appointed acting director of the Department of Military and Technical Policy. It is worth noting that by this time, as the chronology indicates, the contract had already been signed, and almost the entire amount had been paid.
In September, Liev filed a claim against Spetstechnoexport for the machine guns that had not been delivered properly. The document contained a demand to return the money and pay UAH 44 million in fines and penalties. Eventually, this claim went to the commercial court, which recovered money from Spetstechnoexport for the undelivered 200 machine guns (UAH 98 million) and half of the penalties - UAH 22 million. The entire amount was transferred to the account of the Defense Ministry.
In October 2022, the enemy begins to massively attack Ukraine with "shaheds". At this time, machine guns that can shoot down drones are in stock, but they are not used because there are no forms.
In November 2022, the supplier still provides the necessary documents for the machine guns. A commission of the MoD military unit inspects the weapons, signs an acceptance certificate (Form 22), and confirms that the machine guns meet the technical requirements. This means that the commission of gunsmithing officers, who are specialists and serve directly at the military arsenal, had no complaints about their condition, and their conclusion is the basis for accepting the weapons.
Accordingly, on December 9, 2022, Oleksandr Liev, as the head of the Department, signed an acceptance certificate based on the findings of the military commission, which accepted the goods without comment, as stated in the relevant acceptance certificate, which states: "During the inspection of the quality condition, it was found that the large-caliber machine guns KPVT 14.5 mm in the amount of 26 units were completed according to the product form; machine guns DShKM 12.7 mm in the amount of 200 units were completed according to the product form and their technical condition corresponds to category 1 without any comments according to the quality certificate .
Starting in January 2023, military units began to record technical defects in some of the machine guns supplied, which became the basis for claims against the supplier. The supplier, Spetstechnoexport, tried to take the faulty machine guns for warranty repairs after the complaints. Due to the seizure of the weapons in the case, the repair could not be carried out .
What does Lieu's signature mean?
After reviewing the chronology of events, it becomes clear that Liev did not sign a contract for the supply of machine guns and did not transfer funds for them. He signed an act of acceptance of the delivered machine guns while in office.
Lawyer Serhiy Laputko in a commentary to UNN explains that the acceptance of military property is regulated by Form 22 (Appendix 22 to the MoD Order 440). This is the main document confirming the compliance of weapons with contractual terms. He emphasized that this document is filled out exclusively by professional military personnel.
"Before signing the form, the military checks the equipment, checks the specification in accordance with the conditions and accepts the property for permanent storage. Then the Department of Military Policy signs the acceptance certificate, and they register the property," Laputko said.
In other words, when the military arsenal confirmed that the machine guns met the requirements, Lieu had no choice but to sign the acceptance certificate. He had no reason to believe that the machine guns had any defects.
How can the issue of low-quality machine guns be resolved?
The MoD's procurement of weapons is governed by commercial law, and therefore, under the terms of the contract, the supplier is obliged to repair the delivered equipment, replace it or refund the money, including penalties.
And this mechanism works. After all, as already mentioned, the court ordered Spetstechnoexport to return UAH 98 million for the undelivered 200 machine guns and UAH 22 million in fines for delays in delivery under this contract.
However, the substandard machine guns were not returned to the supplier for replacement or repair, but were instead arrested. Accordingly, the supplier cannot pick them up and repair them.
Although Spetstechnoexport does not deny the possibility of replacing and repairing machine guns, it has no access to them due to the arrest.
Instead of machine guns being used in the Armed Forces as soon as possible, they remain arrested, and during the war, every day of delay means losses at the front.
Then what is the suspicion?
The most questionable is the qualification of Liev's actions under Article 191(5) of the Criminal Code (misappropriation or embezzlement of property) and Article 114-1(2) of the Criminal Code (obstruction of the lawful activities of the Armed Forces of Ukraine).
If we evaluate consciously, it is not clear what can be misappropriation or embezzlement in Liiev's case? After all, the contract was signed and paid for before his appointment. He merely followed an administrative procedure based on the conclusions of military experts.
And what was the obstruction of the Armed Forces' activities? Wouldn't it have been a real obstruction not to hand over machine guns to the military when the "shahids" were flying into the country? The commission of officers had no complaints about their condition, and it was on the basis of its findings that the transfer took place. If some of them were of poor quality, the supplier should have repaired them or supplied new ones long ago.
Oleksandr Liev and one of the heads of the state-owned enterprise were expected to be sent to custody with the possibility of bail.
But whoever is among the suspects, the question is different - isn't it time to lift the arrest of the machine guns, repair or replace them under the terms of the contract, and finally send them to the front? Isn't it true that the military doesn't need these weapons?