Andrey Klyuev
Yanukovych's last administrator is rightly suspected of trolling the former Prosecutor General with fake lawsuits, which now threaten Tyahnybok's close associate with criminal prosecution.
Last week, two high-profile scandals erupted around the modest figure of the former head of the Prosecutor General's Office. First, on Thursday, September 18, the press reported that lawyers Oleg Makhnitsky filed a lawsuit in the Pechersk District Court, in which the well-known journalist Sergei Leshchenko and the online publication "Ukrainian Truth" were to be named as defendants.
The gist of the complaint was the plaintiff's demand to refute the false information Leshchenko published back in March of this year on his Facebook page after he met Makhnitsky on Dragomirov Street outside the sales office of the Novopecherskie Lipki residential complex: "He arrived in a brand new Mercedes S-Class, accompanied by three security guards. The showroom manager was showing models of houses and explaining something. Makhnitsky was with his wife." Leshchenko claimed that Makhnitsky's visit took place during business hours (10:00 a.m.). "Makhnitsky and his wife didn't have a single kopeck of savings in their 2013 declaration. I won't comment—I suggest you do that," the journalist wrote at the time.
Sergey Leshchenko
And now the retired Prosecutor General has responded to a proposal from one of UP's most popular authors. In his lawsuit, Makhnitsky claims that Leshchenko used unsubstantiated assumptions in the publication and attempted to create a negative image of him. Among other things, the defendant noted: "The fact that my wife and I have not declared our income does not mean that I have none. I am free to manage my income as I see fit, at my own discretion. Therefore, I am registering all my assets in the name of my mother-in-law, as is traditionally the case with most of our officials and businessmen." The lawsuit also states that Makhnitsky's position as Prosecutor General obligated him to lead a certain lifestyle that would emphasize his important position in society.
Oleg Makhnitsky
Makhnitsky's lawyers, in their prepared statement, emphasized to the judges that during the Maidan and the Prosecutor General's Office's leadership, their client's well-being had predictably improved, allowing him to purchase a new car and real estate. Regarding the incident with the Novopecherskie Lypky visit, they emphasized that the former Prosecutor General's Office head purchased an entire floor in one of the residential buildings there not only because it is the most expensive real estate in Ukraine, but also because he needed to find housing closer to his workplace.
The plaintiff explained that the online publication was brought in as a co-defendant by the fact that the defamatory publication was written with the knowledge of the editorial staff, since, as evidenced by the photocopies attached to the statement, the name "Sergey Leshchenko" clearly and unambiguously states "Works at Ukrainska Pravda."
Makhnitsky assessed the attack on his dignity, honor, and business reputation, which resulted in severe moral suffering, at a symbolic sum (1 hryvnia), demanding that journalist Leshchenko and his employer (UP) refute the information they had previously disseminated and reimburse all legal costs.
However, the looming high-profile case ended almost before it had begun. The fact is that both Serhiy Leshchenko and Ukrainska Pravda have long been under the close protection of the US State Department. Moreover, the journalist, who easily obtained his coveted green card, now spends most of his time overseas. Unsurprisingly, the reaction to the "harassment" came immediately from the American Embassy in Kyiv. That same day, Makhnitsky was summoned to Sikorsky Street, where not even the ambassador, but a second-class clerk, admonished the former official, reminding him of the inadmissibility of infringing on freedom of speech and of a number of incidents in his work that the Prosecutor General's Office is currently conducting internal investigations into.
The implication was clear: if Makhnitsky continued his search for justice in court, he might have the opportunity to participate in several other trials simultaneously—but this time as a defendant in a number of criminal cases related to corruption and abuse of office.
Among the most promising areas in this regard, informed sources cite the trading of positions, one of the most egregious facts of which was the appointment of Nikolai Stoyanov, a figure in numerous corruption scandals, as prosecutor of the Odessa region, which took place shortly before the resignation of the Svoboda Prosecutor General.
Nikolai Stoyanov
The criminal case against the so-called "Boyko rigs," which Makhnitsky himself had seemingly reliably sunk—two drilling rigs purchased in 2010 by the RosUkrEnergo group for the state-owned company Chornomornaftogaz at deliberately inflated prices (damages to the state amounted to over $300 million), could also take an unexpected turn. Incidentally, it was after one of the main defendants in the case, former Chornomornaftogaz Chairman Valeriy Yasyuk, was found not to be involved in any criminal activity by prosecutorial investigators that journalist Leshchenko met the then-Prosecutor General at Novopecherskie Lipki.
Apparently, the reprimand he received from American diplomats impressed Makhnitsky. The very next day, his press service categorically denied that he had filed a lawsuit against Leshchenko. "Oleg Makhnitsky has nothing to do with the information regarding the lawsuit against Sergei Leshchenko," the press service said in a statement. "The information reported in several media outlets that Oleg Makhnitsky is asking for a retraction of the false information Leshchenko published on his Facebook page, citing UP, is an outright lie."
Moreover, according to the same statement from Makhnitsky's press service, it was inadvertently revealed that, alongside the supposedly false lawsuit against Leshchenko, he is actually suing a number of other online publications. However, the lawsuits, the press service acknowledges, are not about the purchase of luxury real estate, but rather about a sex scandal involving, in addition to Makhnitsky, former National Bank Chairman Stepan Kubiv.
As a reminder, on the night of June 18-19 (i.e., immediately after their resignations), both dismissed VIP officials were spotted at a hotel and entertainment complex in the Kyiv suburbs. They attracted unwanted attention by fighting with call girls who were entertaining the high-ranking guests in one of the private cottages. Now, Makhnitsky's press service has stated: "Oleg Igorevich has indeed filed a lawsuit seeking to refute the false information that appeared on certain online resources."
Specifically, the article in question is titled "Did Makhnitsky and Kubiv Give the Police Money to Hush Up the Scandal with the Girls?" It details the methods used by the men involved in the country-side adventures to smooth over the rough edges of their misfortunes. As stated in the lawsuit: "The article is based on facts that are unsubstantiated and contradict reality, depicts Oleg Makhnitsky's supposedly luxurious lifestyle, contains slanderous statements about his immoral behavior, and is aimed at creating a negative image of him."
Meanwhile, some experts on the underbelly of Ukrainian politics are certain that Oleh Makhnitsky has no connection to any of the aforementioned lawsuits. And among the most likely masterminds behind the fabrication of the false statements and the necessary media hype surrounding them, they unanimously name Andriy Klyuyev, the last head of Yanukovych's presidential administration.
As is known, in June of this year, media reports surfaced that the Prosecutor General's Office had submitted a petition to the competent Austrian authorities in the spring requesting that the freeze on Klyuev's accounts be lifted due to insufficient evidence of his guilt. A short time later, the current Prosecutor General, Vitaliy Yarema, confirmed in an interview with the same newspaper, Ukrainska Pravda, that his predecessor had attempted to remove Andriy Klyuev from the wanted list: "When I arrived, there was some movement regarding Klyuev to remove him from the wanted list (!), but these movements were immediately stopped. These are matters for our internal investigations."
Considering the hysteria of Prosecutor Stoyanov, who categorically refused to relinquish the position he'd received from Makhnitsky, it's not hard to imagine that this high-minded nationalist preferred to provide "additional services" for an upfront fee. And a considerable one at that. Therefore, the lawsuits that stirred up the media last week, if they were not indeed filed by Makhnitsky's lawyers but rather forgeries launched on Klyuev's orders, appear to be a very specific "non-lethal" warning.
So, Oleh Makhnitsky, who's always eager for luxury apartments, now needs to either urgently return the deposit or, instead of hiring a horde of lawyers, acquire additional security. Because in Donbas, where Andriy Petrovich learned the hard way as Governor Yanukovych's deputy, they still prefer to resolve issues with "scammers" without resorting to the Pechersk District Court.
Special correspondent
Subscribe to our channels in Telegram, Facebook, Twitter, VC — Only new faces from the section CRYPT!