Ten years of "unfair" criminal prosecution: court denies SAPO's request to detain ex-MP Kriuchkov

The High Anti-Corruption Court has refused to allow the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office to impose a preventive measure of detention on former MP and former chairman of the board of Energomerezha Dmytro Kriuchkov. Anti-corruption activists initiated criminal proceedings against him almost 10 years ago, and all this time he has been living with restrictions, UNN reports.

As you know, the NABU announced the exposure of a scheme to misappropriate funds of PJSC Cherkasyoblenergo and PJSC Zaporizhzhiaoblenergo, involving officials of the above-mentioned oblenergos and PrJSC HC Energomerezha. The investigation of these facts has been ongoing since 2016.

At the hearing, the prosecutor argued that there was a risk of the accused hiding from the court. In particular, because Kryuchkov resides in several European countries. The prosecutor named Hungary as one of them.

At the same time, Kryuchkov himself noted that he had never been to Hungary and suggested that the prosecutor could have confused it with Slovakia, where his children lived.

Kryuchkov and his lawyers objected to the prosecutor's motion. In particular, the defendant emphasized that anti-corruption officers have been investigating the case against him for 10 years.

"For 10 years of his life, he has been living with significant restrictions related to the unfair accusation, which have already negatively affected his lifestyle and private business, which is not connected with the state. 10 years ago, NABU detectives and SAPO prosecutors opened criminal cases against him, his colleagues, and the company. The leadership of these institutions (NABU and SAPO) reported on these criminal proceedings in all the media, including schemes and figures. In one day, they initiated eight criminal proceedings at once, which were then mixed up with each other," the judge said in his ruling.

During the court hearing, it was also recalled that in 2016, Interpol refused to put Kriuchkov on the NABU's international wanted list and detain him. He was detained in Germany under an international legal assistance agreement and released almost immediately. Later, Germany refused to extradite him to NABU. In April 2019, he returned to Ukraine on his own, and the NABU and the SAPO requested that he be taken into custody with an alternative of bail in the amount of UAH 346 million, but the court found this amount unreasonable and set bail at UAH 7 million, which was immediately paid.

"On April 15, 2024, he (Kriuchkov - ed.) filed a motion with the court to transfer this amount (bail of UAH 7 million - ed.) to the needs of the Armed Forces, given the critical state of Ukraine, in particular, the Armed Forces. The prosecutor objected to the satisfaction of his motion to transfer these funds, which had been held by the NABU for five years. The court granted the motion of Kryuchkov and his defense counsel to transfer the bail to the needs of the Armed Forces," the ruling said.

In addition, the lawyers noted that during the criminal proceedings, they reported on the whereabouts of Kryuchkov and his children, who are studying, undergoing treatment and living with him in other countries. The court was provided with specific addresses of their client's residence abroad, so the provisions on putting a person on the international wanted list cannot be fulfilled, as the prosecution knows where he lives.

"In fact, the prosecutor is asking to apply the most severe preventive measure to the father of five minor children only because Kryuchkov is currently abroad with his children and wife, and not because the accused violated the duties imposed on him by the court," Kryuchkov's lawyer said in court.

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine is "known" for its ability to loudly announce the exposure of another scheme and to serve a top official with a notice of suspicion. However, these cases often fall apart in courts or even fail to reach them.

A good example is the criminal proceedings against former Infrastructure Minister Volodymyr Omelyan. Detectives opened one proceeding for possible illicit enrichment and declaration of false information, and another for reducing port fees in 2017.

However, both cases fell apart in the courts. The first one was closed by the High Anti-Corruption Court due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, and the second one was acquitted.

As Volodymyr Omelyan himself noted in an interview with UNN , NABU's criminal proceedings have caused him significant reputational and financial damage. For many years, he has been mentioned in NABU reports as a minister against whom criminal proceedings have been opened, which has led to problems with banking institutions, among other things.

However, the NABU did not officially apologize to the former minister for the illegal criminal prosecution and damage to his business reputation. This was done only by individual detectives in private conversations.

One of the recent "high-profile" cases of the NABU is the case against the former Minister of Agrarian Policy Mykola Solskyi. In April, he was served with a notice of suspicion of seizing land in Sumy region. However, as it turned out later, neither he, nor his family or affiliates have any such land. However, ATO participants, who were granted the right to privatize them, do. The NABU refused to specify what exactly Solsky had seized. Moreover, the detectives tried to "leak" the examination, which they themselves had ordered and which, apparently, was supposed to testify to Solsky's innocence.

However, the public accusations had their effect - the Poles used a formal reason and withdrew from negotiations with Ukraine to unblock the borders, and Solsky resigned from his post as minister. Some experts believe that this move by Poland was premeditated, and it is no coincidence that the Solsky case coincided with the Poles' demarche . In addition, the "loud" statement about the exposure of the land misappropriation scheme took place against the backdrop of a scandal in the NABU itself about the alleged leakage of information from the bureau.