Suspicion not served, case stalled: can the NBU's chief lawyer "write off" the crime due to the statute of limitations?
Kyiv • UNN
The criminal case against the NBU's chief lawyer, Oleksandr Zima, is effectively not being investigated, which may allow him to avoid punishment due to the statute of limitations, according to lawyer Kasyanenko.
Despite the high-profile nature of the criminal proceedings due to the possible abuse of power by the director of the legal department of the National Bank of Ukraine, Oleksandr Zyma, the investigative actions in the case, opened at the end of 2023, are not actually being carried out, no suspicion has been announced, and the figure himself continues to hold office. The founder of the law firm "Kasyanenko and Partners" Dmytro Kasyanenko noted in a commentary to UNN that this may indicate a deliberate delay and will allow the chief lawyer of the NBU to avoid punishment.
Zyma's case
At the end of 2023, criminal proceedings were registered under Part 2 of Art. 364 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (abuse of power or official position, which caused serious consequences). According to UNN, the reason for opening the case was an official letter signed by the chief lawyer of the NBU, Oleksandr Zyma, who is also the chairman of the Administrative Board of the Deposit Guarantee Fund for Individuals, addressed to the Fund. In the document, the official, on behalf of the National Bank of Ukraine, gave a "recommendation" to the DGF to withdraw from the court the lawsuits filed against the NBU by representatives of Concord Bank even before the start of its liquidation process. In the lawsuits, Concord challenged fines totaling almost 63.5 million hryvnias imposed by the regulator.
The Fund followed the recommendation-instruction, which, according to the co-owner of the bank, Olena Sosiedka, deprived the bank's shareholders of their constitutional right to a fair trial.
After the transfer of the investigation of the criminal proceedings to the Pechersk Police Department in the city of Kyiv, Concord's co-owners Olena and Yuliia Sosiedka were recognized as victims. According to lawyers, this means that the investigators recognized that Oleksandr Zyma's actions caused real significant damage.
In response to UNN's request, the police reported that during the investigation they plan to question the chief lawyer of the National Bank, after which they will consider the possibility of applying to the court for his removal from office.
However, according to UNN sources familiar with the investigation, for almost six months no active investigative action has taken place. Since the questioning of the victims, only a few measures have been taken to obtain documents by the investigators, but the questioning of witnesses or the potential suspect, not to mention the change of Oleksandr Zyma's status, is still absent.
Deliberate delay?
Lawyer Dmytro Kasyanenko notes that the situation raises serious doubts about the integrity of the investigation and has all the signs of an artificial delay.
There are reasonable suspicions of a deliberate delay in the investigation. According to the current version of Art. 219 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, the term of pre-trial investigation is calculated not from the moment of entering information into the ERDR, but from the day the person is notified of the suspicion. However, this does not relieve the investigator of the obligation to take the necessary measures to establish the circumstances of the crime. Inaction in such proceedings directly contradicts Art. 28 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, which guarantees the right to a reasonable time for criminal proceedings
The lawyer also emphasizes that if the investigation has actually stopped, despite the availability of primary evidence and victims - this may be a sign of official negligence or intentional stalling of the case by law enforcement agencies.
If a person has not yet been notified of suspicion, but there are victims, primary evidence has been collected and the investigation has stopped without objective reasons, this may indicate official negligence or intentional delay
At the same time, the lawyer drew attention to the fact that by continuing to hold office, Zyma may obstruct the investigation, in particular, influence witnesses, etc. "Under the conditions when the person involved continues to hold office, there is a risk of pressure on witnesses or attempts to avoid responsibility," the lawyer explained.
It is worth noting that, according to Art. 49 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, the statute of limitations for crimes of medium gravity (Part 1 of Art. 364) is 3 years and 5 years for serious crimes (Part 2 of Art. 364), and they are calculated from the moment of the crime, not from the moment of opening criminal proceedings. "If the suspicion is not served within these terms or the case is not transferred to court - the person will avoid punishment. Such actions or inaction of the investigating authorities undermine confidence in justice and constitute a violation of the victims' right to an effective investigation," Kasyanenko stressed.
He also added that in such a situation, victims have the right to file a complaint with the prosecutor, as well as with the investigating judge - with a demand to oblige the pre-trial investigation body to take the necessary procedural actions.
