The unexpected revelation by the founder of Wiki Leaks that the respected British newspaper The Guardian censored his words about Tymoshenko's London wealth is a real sensation for the West.
Julian Assange, journalist, founder and editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks, made this statement during the international media forum “A New Era of Journalism: Farewell to the Mainstream.”
Specifically, he was asked whether he regretted the decision several years ago to distribute the WikiLeaks files through "major mainstream newspapers—Le Monde, El Pais, and so on." Assange echoed the skepticism of his colleague who had asked the question: "These five major publishing houses did, indeed, censor our publications in a completely outrageous manner. And it's all documented. We compared the cables they published with the ones we had, and there was significant editing. And we saw what they cut out—for example, The Guardian cut out the fact that Yulia Tymoshenko hid her wealth in London."
The sensation isn't that Yulia Tymoshenko very likely owns property in the UK capital. Nor is it even that, according to her asset declaration, she only rents housing in Kyiv. The sensation is the Western press's censorship itself.
It turns out that such "editing" is carried out by highly respectable lobbying firms. Ukrainian readers are in luck, because unlike Yulia Tymoshenko herself, her lobbyists declare every cent—and in the UK, every penny—received to defend their clients' interests.
Take a look at the scan below – they don't hesitate to include the client's first and last name – it's written as Yulia Tymoshenko.
And here we come to the most interesting part. Where do these successful Western lobbyists get these hundreds of thousands and even millions of dollars for Tymoshenko's benefit? After all, according to her official income declaration, for example, last year the leader of Batkivshchyna lived on a single parliamentary salary of about 75,000 hryvnias per year, or about $250 per month at the current exchange rate. Almost certainly from offshore accounts.
Meanwhile, the BYuT leader is blazing a trail of napalm in Kyiv: "The deoffshorization issue is being blocked by the Ukrainian president's business partners from the BPP and People's Front parliamentary factions, who conduct their business through offshore companies." Yulia Volodymyrivna, without a moment's hesitation, informed Ukrainians of this on Channel 112 immediately after the Panama Papers scandal erupted. There's no evidence, of course, and why bother? Now let them justify themselves...
A few days later she added fuel to the fire…
According to Tymoshenko, Nina Yuzhanina, head of the Verkhovna Rada's Tax Committee, opposed two bills registered in the Verkhovna Rada that "close the possibility of money laundering through offshore companies," "because she has been a business partner of Poroshenko for many years. "As long as the business partners of officials who operate through offshore companies decide whether or not to consider deoffshorization laws, we will never bring money out of the shadows," Tymoshenko stated.
Of course, only those familiar with Tymoshenko's own long-standing offshore practices knew that the latter statement sounded more than ambiguous.
Of course, her cunning political consultants advised her to act as Ukraine's anti-offshore conscience. The hope was that the electorate would naturally conclude that Tymoshenko's conscience is clear when it comes to offshore companies, and therefore she is allowed to denounce even the president himself.
And the fact that Yulia Tymoshenko had "moments" in her life before, which we've already written about: the Panamanian offshore company Somoli Enterprises, her joint business with Pavlo Lazarenko, and the American court's recognition of the embezzlement of millions of dollars from Ukraine to Tymoshenko's Panamanian company... That was a long time ago, a lot of water has flowed under the bridge. Yulia Tymoshenko even managed to spend a couple of years in prison and has probably reformed. But she wasn't imprisoned for siphoning offshore funds, and even after her imprisonment, she never returned the billions of hryvnias from the offshore accounts to the country. Even after the revolution, even to finance the invisible "Opora movement," the creation of which she pompously announced during the 2014 election campaign. Tymoshenko's offshore accounts are one thing, and patriotic appeals to the nation's conscience are quite another.
But let's return to the matter at hand. Let's remember the modest, talented young lawyer who entered parliament as the fifth candidate on the BYuT list – 28-year-old Olena Ivanovna Shkrum. Besides studying at the Institute of International Relations at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, she has a master's degree from the Sorbonne, a law degree from Cambridge, and even worked as a judicial assistant in London.
This is the kind of talented youth that Yulia Vladimirovna gathers around herself... To be fair, it should be noted that Elena Shkrum, as is customary, has a father - Ivan Shkrum, a prominent capital lawyer.
Well, as they say, enough with the dirty innuendo! It's just that talented parents make talented children. However, one circumstance somewhat spoils the picture: Ivan Shkrum is mentioned in the Panama Papers as a beneficiary of the offshore company Betal management Ltd.
The company was registered in the Virgin Islands not sometime in the distant past, but on November 16, 2015. The account is held in a Latvian bank. Betal's co-owner is Trident Overseas Management Ltd., registered in Central America, whose founders are 92 companies with exotic names. This scheme also involves an intermediary: Goldstar Equity Ltd., with its 1335 (!) real enterprises.
This means that the father of the young and talented member of the BYuT parliamentary club, ranked fifth, is an active offshore operator. It would be naive to assume that Elena Shkrum received an education at the world's best universities and took fifth place on the party list without her father's money.
It's possible that his offshore companies helped hire successful lobbyists who edited Western press publications. Hiring lobbyists is a common practice for the BYuT.
In 2011, a scandal erupted over the funding of Western lobbyists whose goal was to clear Yulia Tymoshenko's name in the Kyoto Protocol funds owed to Ukraine. During her premiership, Tymoshenko used the funds to purchase Opel vans as rural ambulances. While these vehicles were completely unsuitable for this purpose, they were perfect for financial scams.
An international scandal was brewing, and the BYuT hired professional lobbyists in the West to prove everything was clean. These services were allegedly paid for by MP Hryhoriy Nemyria, also from offshore accounts.
The hack of his personal email, which quickly spread across the internet, is more than revealing. Consider for yourself the sums spent on restoring the patroness's good name in this scan:
It later emerged that this wasn't an isolated incident: Tymoshenko's camp had been paying for expensive international PR services for six years. The figure was reported to be $72 million. According to the website nemyrialeaks.com, the BYuT collaborated with the British company Ridge Consulting Limited and used it to negotiate with the media for "laudatory odes."
Invoices for services were issued in Nemyri's name, but they were paid from offshore companies, which is already an attempt to hide payments or evade taxes.
For his part, BYuT deputy Serhiy Vlasenko called the scandal a provocation. "A website has been created that posts inaccurate documents, which are then extracted and commented on. This is a completely artificial thing, created to discredit Hryhoriy Mykhailovych Nemyria," he indignantly declared. But Nemyria himself, for some reason, refused to comment. The Ukrainian Human Rights Alliance even filed a lawsuit against him over the matter.
We don't know about Ridge Consulting Limited, Nemyri, and the $72 million, but we do know that at the same time, the BYuT was collaborating with international PR firms TD International and Covington & Burling LLP, which hadn't previously been mentioned in the press. TDI's services cost the BYuT over three million dollars in 2008, and C&B LLP's services cost them $660 in 2011.
Moreover, it seems that legitimate work wasn't always paid for. Perhaps some expense items conceal funding for less than desirable services. Indeed, even a "European Media Review" produced by a reputable company like TD International can't possibly cost $183...
Perhaps, under the guise of party PR, someone was funneling their own money to London, which The Guardian refused to report. Or perhaps this reluctance was spurred by international PR agencies that have been feeding off the BYuT party coffers for years?
We're confident that the BYuT continues to pay for their expensive services. We even have a good idea who within the party is responsible for this. Therefore, Yulia Vladimirovna would be better off not giving in to cynical ecstasy, but focusing on the much-needed legislative work of amending national tax legislation so that she doesn't have to transfer funds to offshore accounts to pay for these or those services.
In short, it was a case of mooing, and Yulina remained silent...
ON TOPIC: According to the IMF and the World Bank, since 2004, an average of $11,7 billion has been laundered annually through shadow schemes in Ukraine, and in 2015, $14.2 billion.
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, Facebook , Twitter , VK - Only new faces from the SKLEP section!