There's a concept in international jurisprudence called the presumption of innocence. The British boast that they've been practicing this approach for hundreds of years with anyone accused of anything—a person is innocent until proven guilty and a verdict is final.
But this postulate, like so many other pillars on which Western civilization is supposedly built, doesn't stand up to the test of practice. As in Vinokur's interlude: "Here we play, here we don't play, here's a greasy spot—the fish was wrapped."
The famous 19th-century British trade union leader Thomas Joseph Dunning wrote with good reason: “At 300 percent there is no crime that it (capital) would not risk, even on pain of the gallows.”
But neither Dunning nor Karl Marx, who cited him in his famous "Capital," had even the faintest idea of how far capital could go. Especially when the horizon looms not in the millions, but in the tens and hundreds of millions, which can be obtained without investing a single farthing.
Kyiv has never proven anyone's guilt.
Sergey Arbuzov
Almost 50 million dollars "allegedly" belong to Arbuzov
The unwavering unity between the rulers of Latvia and the remnants of Ukraine is a perfect illustration of their all-consuming greed. A few days ago, a district (!) court in Riga confiscated $49,3 million, allegedly belonging to former First Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine Serhiy Arbuzov, for the benefit of this Baltic state.
Why presumably? And here's where the detective story begins. The fact is that over the past two and a half years, Kyiv has failed to prove a single corruption case against the "bloody panda regime"—Yanukovych and his entourage.
Oh yes, Interpol was alerted, telegrams were sent around the world demanding the freezing of the "stolen billions," and the media in Ukraine "and throughout civilized humanity" relished the details and sums of the theft. But...
But this summer, the renowned international organization Transparency International, together with lawyers for the infamous "Heavenly Hundred" and a number of anti-corruption organizations, published a joint communiqué stating:
"It's already the second half of 2016, and the Ukrainian law enforcement system hasn't produced any results: not a single guilty verdict against organizers or officials, not a single dollar returned to the state... Transparency will keep a close eye on the cases involving Viktor Yanukovych, Oleksandr Yanukovych, Yuriy Boyko, Oleksandr Klymenko, Vitaliy Zakharchenko, Sergey Arbuzov, Yuriy Ivanyushchenko, Andriy Klyuyev..."
Viktor Yanukovych
Kyiv, of course, knows that Yanukovych stole, but still can’t prove it.
It turns out that the entire state apparatus in Kyiv lacked the strength to bring any of the above-mentioned individuals to trial and convict them, including Sergei Arbuzov.
Moreover, European courts at various levels repeatedly rule in their favor. Recently, the EU Court of Justice ordered Kyiv to pay 6,378 million hryvnias to Yanukovych and his sons, including the late Viktor. That's over 57 pounds each.
A mechanism for the return of corrupt money has not been created.
But let's return to Sergei Arbuzov. In early 2015, he was placed on an international wanted list, and assets worth enormous sums, presumably belonging to Sergei Arbuzov or individuals and organizations affiliated with him, were frozen in various foreign financial institutions, including Latvian ones.
For example, Ukraine's domestic government bonds with a face value of $1,021 billion. The amounts in the accounts of Arbuzov and the rest of his company were so large that Kyiv media seriously debated how long they would last to fill the country's leaky budget.
But by the end of that same year, 2015, Interpol lifted the wanted list for former official Arbuzov (and many others) due to the fact that his prosecution was not criminal, but political in nature. Furthermore, in January 2015, the EU Court in Luxembourg unfroze Arbuzov's accounts based on the presumption of innocence: "The Court found that a person cannot be held liable for the misappropriation of funds solely on the grounds that they are the subject of a preliminary investigation in a third country, without the EU authorities having a clear understanding of the circumstances of that investigation."
Simply put, all the funds seized in various countries are not de jure “hard-earned” by anyone from Yanukovych’s circle or Yanukovych himself (the same Sergei Arbuzov), because this has not been proven in court.
Of course, everyone understands perfectly well that billions of dollars were stolen and redistributed "correctly" under Yanukovych. People, ordinary people, know this. But the "new centurions" who seized power in Kyiv, for some reason, haven't bothered to prove it in all these years.
And although they have already passed not hundreds, but thousands of laws, a mechanism for returning the frozen assets of corrupt officials abroad has still not been created.
Coincidence? Not at all. It's much more cynical and worse.
How to take money
The fact is that while the EU is lifting sanctions against Yanukovych-era officials and making interim decisions on compensation and the return of funds invested in litigation, the assets frozen in banks in various countries remain seized. And the banks are using these assets with all their might, completely legally.
After World War II, the West began to combat asset turnover outside state control. Naturally, under plausible pretexts—fighting the mafia, drug trafficking, international crime, and terrorism.
And although the mafia, drug trafficking, and terrorism were only "pumping up their muscles," the measures taken somehow didn't hinder them. An excellent international mechanism for extorting money from undesirable citizens of any state had been developed. And it was enshrined in hundreds of various international documents.
In particular, paragraph "b" of part 8 of Article 18 of the "Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime", adopted in 1990, provides that death (or being outside the jurisdiction) cannot serve as an obstacle to the confiscation of funds if a confiscation order has been issued against the deceased.
As a result, the legislation of the United States, Great Britain and other European (and not only) countries provides for the possibility of confiscation of property obtained as a result of the commission of a crime or used as a means of committing a crime, as well as income received from the use of such property in relation to persons whose death occurred before the sentencing.
Moreover, the States Parties to the Convention have undertaken "obligations to seize property through the execution by the competent authority of a confiscation order issued by a court of the requested Party, in order to enable the confiscation of such property without a criminal conviction in cases where the offender cannot be prosecuted by reason of death, absconding, absence or in other appropriate cases."
This refers to the possibility, within the framework of mutual legal assistance, to search for and seize property for the purpose of subsequent confiscation, acquired as a result of the commission of any of the crimes provided for by conventional norms or used in the commission of such crimes, in accordance with its domestic law, regardless of the presence or absence of the person who committed the crime
.
Latvian taxpayers have become richer
As we can see, the "civilized West" ignored the presumption of innocence and provided for the possibility of confiscating seized assets even BEFORE a guilty verdict was issued.
"Latvian law allows for capital to be recognized as illegally acquired and confiscated even before the investigation is completed. The State Police took advantage of this opportunity. During the search for the owners of dirty Ukrainian capital in Latvian banks, the Ziemele District Court in Riga has already ordered the confiscation of dubious funds three times. And 50 million euros, as criminally acquired, were transferred to the Latvian budget," Latvian media reports.
The funniest thing is that Sergei Arbuzov himself denies having anything to do with the confiscated money. And not a single court, either in Riga or Kyiv, has determined whose money was confiscated.
The same Riga district court that so excited Kyiv anti-corruption activists
But the detective story of violations of fundamental legal principles doesn't end there. Immediately following the ruling by Riga's Ziemelsky District Court, hysteria erupted in Kyiv.
"For two years, the Ukrainian parliament has failed to pass the laws necessary to confiscate the Yanukovych family's assets, unlike Latvia. Not a cent of the stolen assets under Yanukovych has entered the Ukrainian budget. In total, assets belonging to Yanukovych's criminal "family" have been seized, amounting to over $1,5 billion... Following the Latvian precedent, other Yanukovych assets could be seized for foreign budgets... Today, Latvian taxpayers have replenished their coffers from our budget," writes journalist Yuriy Butuso.a.
The outrage of the Maidan public is easy to understand – they perceive any money "off the books" as a personal insult, even in cases where there is no chance of profiting personally.
But the "potheads" don't stand a chance. As for those very same senior officials whom they brought to power after the armed coup, their apparent sluggishness in passing the necessary laws is dictated by a well-thought-out greed. This was practically openly stated by Deputy Prosecutor General Yevgeny Yenin on September 15.
Kyiv lost money
It turns out that Latvia confiscated $49,3 million using a special procedure, without a criminal conviction, because otherwise the seizure of these assets would have been lifted. And the money would have disappeared.
Now, following the confiscation decision, Latvian authorities have expressed their willingness to discuss with their "Ukrainian colleagues" the possibility of redistributing this money. This is, of course, provided Kyiv can prove that the confiscated funds originated in Ukraine, were transferred to Latvia from the accounts of Ukrainian residents, and were acquired through criminal activity.
An "embassy" made up of employees from the Prosecutor General's Office has already been dispatched to Riga to participate in the negotiations. Considering that, in addition to the funds already confiscated from Latvian bank accounts, tens of millions of dollars, euros, and Swiss francs belonging to other Ukrainian residents have been frozen, officials in Kyiv and Riga have much to discuss and divide.
This won't require any trials, convictions, publicity, or transparency. High-ranking officials from both countries will simply discuss how, who exactly should receive the funds, and what amounts. And there's room for negotiation.
For example, the assets attributed to Sergei Ivanyushchenko in Latvia, which have not yet been confiscated, amount to $32 million and 72 million Swiss francs. And no one will ever know exactly how the confiscated sums were divided or under what conditions they were transferred to the Latvian budget.
It sounds like: “Gentlemen, we are prepared to continue not providing you with the evidence necessary for the return of assets to Ukraine if you transfer 25 percent of the amounts you confiscate to the Swiss bank accounts that we have written down on this piece of paper.”
It's possible that the actual interest rate will ultimately be different. And the account won't even be in Switzerland. It's even possible that the payment will be made using other assets, but that's not the point. What we have here is a clear example of how, at least in the matter of redistributing funds, Ukrainian officials have fully mastered the European rules of the game, a common language with their Western counterparts, and are successfully working hand in hand to polish up what little remains in Ukraine. This includes the assets of their less successful colleagues from the Yanukovych era.
“There is no crime that capital would not risk…”
In topic: Yuriy Boyko – "The Untouchable"
Alexander Klimenko. He flew away, but he really wants to return.
Michael Onufrienko
AT Kharkiv
Subscribe to our channels in Telegram, Facebook, Twitter, VC — Only new faces from the section CRYPT!