There is only one way out - Zyma "to the exit," or why the chief lawyer of the NBU should leave his post

In civilized and democratic countries, officials, especially those involved in public finances, who are suspected of official crimes or loss of trust, leave office without waiting for a court decision. They are either fired, or they resign on their own immediately after the start of an investigation by law enforcement agencies or journalistic investigations. However, unfortunately, in Ukraine, the institution of business reputation regarding officials does not work at all. A striking example of this is the situation with the chief lawyer of the National Bank of Ukraine, Oleksandr Zyma, against whom a criminal case has been opened for alleged abuse of power or official position, writes UNN.

At the end of 2023, the director of the legal department of the NBU, Oleksandr Zyma, became a figurant in a criminal proceeding opened under Part 2 of Art. 364 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (abuse of power or official position).

The case was opened because of his letter to the Deposit Guarantee Fund for Individuals (DGF). In the document, Zyma, who is simultaneously the director of the legal department of the NBU and the chairman of the Administrative Council of the DGF, recommended on behalf of the National Bank that the Fund withdraw the lawsuits filed by Concord Bank against the NBU. These lawsuits concerned the cancellation of fines amounting to almost 63.5 million hryvnias and were filed even before the decision on the liquidation of the bank.

The Deposit Guarantee Fund heeded this recommendation and withdrew the lawsuits, which, according to Olena Sosedka, co-founder of Concord Bank, deprived the bank's shareholders of their constitutional right to a fair trial.

In the fall of 2024, Zyma's case was transferred from the SBI to the investigation of the Pechersk Police Department of Kyiv. Law enforcement officers informed UNN that they plan to interrogate the chief lawyer of the NBU, and after handing him a notice of suspicion, the investigators will probably appeal to the court to remove Zyma from the duties of director of the legal department of the NBU. The investigators also recognized Concord co-founders Olena and Yulia Sosedko as victims in this criminal proceeding, confirming that Zyma's actions caused harm. That is, it is not about ethical violations, but real losses.

Currently, Oleksandr Zyma continues to work calmly at the National Bank of Ukraine and receive exorbitant income. In particular, in 2024, the civil servant received more than UAH 8 million in income, in fact from taxes paid by Ukrainians and used to maintain the state apparatus. Obviously, the management of the National Bank is not worried that Zyma is compromised, has lost trust, and it is already publicly known that he is a defendant in a criminal case.

Zero tolerance for scandals

It is worth noting that among European countries and in the USA, there is zero tolerance for officials who are involved in scandals or criminal cases. The financial sector is no exception. There are many examples of officials of state banks leaving office immediately after losing trust.

For example, the CEO of Swedbank, Birgitte Bonnesen, was dismissed in 2019 due to a money laundering scandal. Later, in 2024, she was sentenced to 15 months in prison.

Danske Bank CEO Thomas Borgen left his position in 2018 due to an investigation into the laundering of EUR 200 billion related to Russia. He was not officially charged, but he did not return to his position.

David Drumm, head of the Irish Anglo Irish Bank, was fired after a scandal regarding his alleged involvement in a number of economic crimes. 

Even Maltese Prime Minister Joseph Muscat officially resigned - amid a crisis surrounding the investigation into the murder of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia. She was investigating corruption and died in 2017: the journalist's car was blown up while she was driving. 

These are just a few examples of when even top managers and officials of foreign central banks are not untouchable. These examples demonstrate that the reputation of the regulator is more important than any names.

The central bank is not just a regulator, but an institution that builds trust in the entire banking system and influences negotiations with international partners. The National Bank of Ukraine is no exception, it is in constant contact with the IMF, the World Bank and other investors and creditors.

In this regard, the question arises, how can a person who committed an official crime continue to work in such a state body? The next logical question is, who is contributing to the fact that Oleksandr Zyma has not even been suspended from his duties yet? 

In the context of a full-scale war, when Ukraine is almost completely dependent on international support, such reputational risks can seriously harm the state. Is it really the case that in our case, one surname is more important than financial stability?