Audit of ESBU criminal cases should be the first step toward rebooting the agency

The exposure of bribery and the trading of criminal proceedings by employees of the Bureau of Economic Security (BES) raises the urgent question of the need for an audit of cases investigated by this law enforcement agency. This concerns the possible systemic use of criminal prosecution tools to pressure businesses, create artificial obstacles to economic activity, and worsen the investment climate in the country. This opinion was expressed by lawyer Oleh Shram in an exclusive comment to UNN.

Bribery and trading in criminal liability

According to Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko, a senior detective of the BES territorial administration in the Kyiv region and an analyst of the Bureau's central office were exposed in two separate criminal proceedings for using their official positions to obtain unlawful benefits.

According to the investigation, one demanded 15,000 dollars from a man previously involved in a case regarding the production and sale of counterfeit money, in exchange for not bringing him to criminal liability again. The other promised a representative of an enterprise to facilitate the issuance of a fuel storage license through his connections in the tax service for 2,000 dollars.

A system that is supposed to protect the state's economy cannot be a place for those who try to use their position for personal enrichment

People's deputies interviewed by UNN speak about the need for an audit of criminal proceedings investigated by the BES to check if they were commissioned. They also point to the need for a reboot and cleansing of the law enforcement agency. 

This issue looks particularly relevant against the backdrop of a series of criminal proceedings that the BES is investigating regarding Ukrainian airlines. At least five air carriers that use aircraft leased from non-resident companies of Ukraine have come under investigation.

Investigators of the Bureau of Economic Security are convinced that airlines should pay royalties in Ukraine, i.e., a fee charged for the use of intellectual property. At the same time, the fact that transport is not intellectual property is completely ignored, and Conventions on the avoidance of double taxation are in force between Ukraine and a number of countries. According to these agreements, Ukrainian companies pay taxes for leasing in the countries where the lessor companies are residents. Airlines UIA, "Constanta Airline", "Urga", "H3OPERATIONS", and "Skyline" have already suffered from BES pressure. Furthermore, court materials indicate similar approaches in other industries, where they are trying to impose an additional levy on leased railway transport and even agricultural machinery.

Experts interviewed by UNN have repeatedly stated that there are no grounds for criminal prosecution in these cases, as they are based on an incorrect interpretation of lease payments as royalties, made by former tax officials in an article from 2024. There have been no changes in the legislation regarding the taxation of leasing over the last 30 years.

Criminal cases as a tool of pressure on business

Lawyer Oleh Shram notes that the misuse of criminal proceedings by law enforcement officers is a major problem.

Very often we encounter the use of criminal proceedings and criminal procedure tools for purposes other than those provided by law. In particular, for the purpose of obstructing legitimate economic activity or inducing the receipt of an unlawful benefit

According to the expert, despite numerous statements about ending pressure on business in cases related to entrepreneurial activity, the problem remains relevant.

This indicates issues with the selection of employees for law enforcement agencies, proper procedural supervision of investigations, and the effectiveness of the fight against abuses by law enforcement officers themselves

One of the main problems remains the practice of criminal proceedings existing for years without procedural decisions being made. This factor most often indicates that cases are commissioned or used for the purpose of pressure.

Such criminal proceedings very often drag on for one, two, three, or four years without decisions being made. Individual investigative actions are carried out sporadically, while people and companies remain in a state of limbo

In his opinion, such a situation causes significant damage to business even without the announcement of suspicions or the transfer of the case to court for consideration on the merits. After all, as Oleh Shram explains, any information about searches, temporary access to documents, or other investigative actions enters the court register and specialized databases. As a result, this negatively affects its business reputation.

The reputation of the business entity suffers. Counterparties see information about investigative actions and start asking questions. For business, this creates additional risks and obstacles to work

An audit is possible today

The lawyer is convinced that checking the legality of opening criminal proceedings is entirely realistic and provided for by current legislation.

Of course, an audit is possible and necessary. In every criminal proceeding, there is a prosecutor. Their task is either to ensure the fastest possible referral of the case to court or to close it. If it is established that the proceedings were initiated without sufficient grounds and there are no signs of a crime, the prosecutor has all the powers to close it independently

The expert also draws attention to the need to assess the legality of investigative actions already carried out, searches, seizures of property, and the effectiveness of judicial control.

The fact of receiving an unlawful benefit is only a narrow example of a much broader problem. There are issues of illegal detentions, illegal searches, and seizures of property. Often, investigating judges actually automatically approve the motions of pre-trial investigation bodies without going into the details of the case

Without an audit, there will be no trust

The new leadership of the BES has been given a chance to prove that the reboot of the agency will be not only personnel-related but also substantive. To do this, it is necessary not just to identify individual corruption episodes among employees, but to conduct a review of high-profile criminal proceedings that have been creating risks for business for years, threatening an entire industry, and having no obvious prospect of being transferred to court because they contradict existing judicial practice.

Specifically, the cases regarding aircraft leasing could be the first step in testing the BES's readiness to work in the interests of the state rather than supporting dubious practices of pressure on business. If the audit shows the absence of a crime, such proceedings must be closed. Otherwise, any statements about reforming the Bureau of Economic Security risk remaining merely declarations.