The government has a real mechanism to seize $300 billion of Russian assets, but ignores it - Kulyk

Ukraine has the opportunity to start the process of receiving up to $300 billion in frozen Russian assets (of which $210 billion are in the EU) right now, using existing judicial precedent. However, the state is effectively not using this mechanism, relying on less effective paths. This was stated by political scientist, director of the Center for Civil Society Research Vitaliy Kulyk in his column on "Censor.NET", UNN writes.

According to the expert, while the authorities are betting on creating damage registries and awaiting reparations after the war, there is a faster legal path. In May 2024, the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv satisfied a lawsuit to recover $12.19 billion from Russia in favor of a private individual.

Kulyk emphasizes the uniqueness of this decision: the court qualified Russia's actions not as "war crimes" (which are covered by sovereign immunity), but as an economic crime in the banking sector. This decision created the necessary "legal title" - a legal claim for recovery, the absence of which is often speculated on by EU countries, particularly Belgium.

The political scientist details that the case is based not on compensation for war damages, but on the fact of embezzlement of funds from a Ukrainian bank and its bankruptcy by a criminal group under the control of the Russian Federation. The court found that this was part of the preparation for full-scale aggression. It was the qualification of the actions as a civil tort related to money laundering that allowed the Ukrainian judiciary to legally not apply Russia's state immunity.

The author also draws attention to the fact that European courts are currently delaying the consideration of similar cases, awaiting political signals from their governments. Kulyk emphasizes: the return of applications without consideration or the inaction of EU courts is a direct violation of Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which gives Ukraine additional leverage.

"The authorities must diplomatically remind the EU of the signed Hague Convention on the Mutual Recognition of Court Decisions. Ignoring these documents is indirect assistance to the aggressor," the political scientist notes.

Kulyk also warns that credit programs from the EU could become a trap. In his opinion, receiving loans instead of direct confiscation will deprive Ukraine of the right to income from frozen assets, as they will go to pay interest on new debts.

"This is an opportunity for the authorities not to ask for help, but to demand the fulfillment of obligations undertaken by Europe," the expert summarized.