THE RETURN OF THE PRODIGAL SON, OR HOW THE SQUIRREL BEGGES FOR A POSITION BEAUTIFULLY

The change of power in Ukraine has brought home some officials tired of being on the run. One of these is three-time Prosecutor General Svyatoslav Piskun, who has been hiding abroad for the past year and a half. Now Piskun is searching for his place in the new reality, while simultaneously trying to disavow his past political companions and the "inconvenient" stories associated with him. See for yourself how this works for the author of the words "I returned to help the country I love."

On September 1, our colleagues from Obozrevatel published an interview with former Prosecutor General of Ukraine Svyatoslav Piskun.

Everything would be fine, as they say, eaten and forgotten, but there are a number of important points due to which what the international tourist Piskun, as he calls himself, said cannot be ignored by the "Prosecutor's Truth."

From everything said with the deepest confidence, we again hear the same old “Kuchma is to blame for everything,” “Kuchma ordered it,” “Kuchma gave the order,” etc.

But we are not simple people, in times of general obsession with the blunders of the previous government, “a word is not a sparrow” and everyone’s thirst to capture the prosecutor’s house acquired during the Kuchma era somewhere near Koncha-Zaspa (where, by the way, Piskun’s dacha is still located), an appeal to Danilych simply doesn’t cut it.

The only one currently pursuing this case is the Prosecutor General's Office, which will once again be investigating the involvement of Ukraine's second president in the murder of journalist Georgiy Gongadze. How could they not seize the opportunity to both show off in front of the new government and clear their name? Change their status, so to speak.

Which is essentially what Piskun did.

Moment number one. "The authorities have continually obstructed the investigation into the Georgiy Gongadze case. The situation with this case in Ukraine is a kind of litmus test for the development of democracy and the rule of law in the country."

Svyatoslav Mykhailovich, what prevented you from pursuing the case to its conclusion even after your dismissal as Prosecutor General of Ukraine, especially since, according to your claim, you were one step away from identifying the perpetrators? And if so, why didn't you immediately say it was Kuchma and quietly allow him to fire you? Could we quote what you said in November 2011: "During the criminal investigation into Gongadze, neither in 2002, nor in 2003, nor in 2005, did Kuchma or anyone else pressure me, interfere, or demand any illegal actions from me. It was strange. Every day I expected to be called into the office and told, 'Down with me!' I expected it, and I understood it was possible, but I must give credit where credit is due—they left me alone and gave me the opportunity to work."

As for the development of democracy, you are absolutely right; it was precisely its “development” that allowed you to become Prosecutor General for the second and third time, and in 2006, to join the ranks of the Party of Regions, purely on cue, without solving the high-profile case of the murder of a well-known journalist.

Point number two. "Gongadze was the first to show the people of Ukraine that not all is well in our country, that there are major problems with corruption, with those who have earned a lot, and with those who have nothing. You probably remember the 'Ukraine without Kuchma' protest, when blood was collected in cups outside the Ministry of Internal Affairs. It was a public protest against all this, but Gongadze started it." – Of course we do, just as we also remember that during the time of Georgiy Gongadze's active journalistic work, you, Svyatoslav Mykhailovych, served as the head of the Investigative Department of the Tax Police of the State Tax Administration of Ukraine, so of all people, this clearly affected you.

And although “anything suits a scoundrel,” it still doesn’t suit you to stoop to the level of discussing the work of a journalist who investigated corruption schemes, and it’s certainly not for you to evaluate it.

Oh, and by the way, I almost forgot. When you returned from your tour in March of this year, you said the following: "If I'm treated well, the government is fine. Kuchma worked with me, and everything was fine for him. He fired me, and a year and a half later, he was gone. Yushchenko fired him, and he was gone too. Same with Yanukovych: I left the faction, and a year and a half later…"

So you decide: either everything was fine, or Gongadze really did have something to do.

Point number three. "Did Pukach and his accomplices have orders to kill Gongadze? The investigation should have answered that question. The second question: who knew about the murder, and to whom was it reported? The investigation should have answered that question as well. There aren't many unanswered questions. Over the course of a year and a half of this investigation, Viktor Shokin, the investigative department, and I essentially solved the case and arrested Pukach back in 2003."

Wait a minute, 2003 – Pukach was arrested, but in 2005 you reopened the Gongadze investigation, arrested the police officers, collected evidence, inspected the crime scene, even commissioned an international expert analysis. But lo and behold – some Yushchenko came along again and fired you. The case wasn't solved, and you declared it wasn't in the president's interests, and, in general, "Leave Kuchma alone."

But everyone knows perfectly well that your second term as Prosecutor General is the result of an agreement between Kuchma and Yushchenko. Therefore, your statement: "If Kuchma hadn't fired me back then, and therefore hadn't fired the entire Prosecutor's Office board that was working there, there wouldn't be any questions today. They would all have been clarified by now" is nothing more than a farce.

What were you doing back then? — Politicking, and you even stated this in one interview, saying you were completely dependent on politics.

And by the way, is this the Shokin you're talking about, who is now working for Yarema (as, incidentally, he did under Yanukovych) and hasn't solved a single "high-profile case"?

Point number four. "...investigating the Gongadze murder today and investigating it under Kuchma, Kravchenko, Medvedchuk, and others are two different investigations. Today, no one is stopping Yarema from investigating the terrorists, the police officers who beat people on the Maidan, and the murderers of the Heavenly Hundred. But, unfortunately, there are no results yet. When I served as Prosecutor General and investigated the Gongadze case, every summons to the Presidential Administration could have been my last. Moreover, after Kuchma illegally dismissed me from my post the day after Pukach's arrest, the American Embassy warned me that my life was in danger. To those who now say Piskun and his team could have done more, I wish health and happiness. May they do more today."

It's good that you're giving the new Prosecutor General Yarema a kick in the pants; that's always necessary and helpful. But we're asking you exactly the same question! Especially since times were different, and you only had a couple of high-profile cases, which you kept taking on, only to be dismissed again and again. He's unlikely to accept Yarema's offer to report to Poroshenko, but he'll certainly consider you as a source of additional and valuable information. Ukraine has never seen a Prosecutor General who changed their political stance so regularly and so drastically, while having the power to open criminal cases against anyone. So you have nothing to fear.

And by the way, what about the criminal case you opened against current President Petro Poroshenko? We'll remind you, otherwise we might have to go and bow to him.

And point number five. "I'm 100% certain, let the people of Ukraine know, that if Kuchma hadn't dismissed me as Prosecutor General in 2003, Pukach would have issued a full schedule for everyone, and we would have arrested everyone involved in this case. And maybe some would be in prison, but they would still be alive."

How much longer will you feed the people of Ukraine this "thing"? What prevented you from moving forward with the prosecution of Kuchma, Lytvyn, Yanukovych, and Azarov after the Melnichenko tapes were authenticated, which, according to you, was proven by the US FBI?Read more about him in the article "Mykola Azarov: The Survivor") and others? Politics again?

In 2006, a joke circulated: “Svyatoslav Piskun, who had been reinstated as Prosecutor General, opened a criminal case against President Yushchenko for ‘obstructing the investigation of Petro Poroshenko’s case.’”

If you're begging for a position in the "new" prosecutor's office, do it in front of the people and with prepared answers to the questions posed above.

The Prosecutor's Truth has only one question: does the Prosecutor's Office currently need a "responsible" Piskun, someone who truly "does his job," excuse me, an ancient profession (after all, it's only for the sake of the position), who, in the event of a force majeure situation, immediately moves to the Côte d'Azur, and then comes back and teaches others how to live and work?

Prosecutor's Truth

Subscribe to our channels in Telegram, Facebook, Twitter, VC — Only new faces from the section CRYPT!