Andrey Kaluzhinskiy
The war is dividing us and causing new serious harm. Our long-term issues have not vanished. The belief that a major disaster ended corruption for all is not true. That's a scary finding from the conversation with the head of NABU's main detective unit, Andrey Kaluzhinskiy. He is one of the initial creators of the anti-corruption bureau, but operates with very little public exposure. This is his first interview in seven years of work, and it's with ZN.UA.
Unlike former NABU director Artem Sytnyk and current acting director Gizo Uglava, Kaluzhinskiy is focused on procedures. The NABU director handles the media aspects, while the chief detective deals with the legal side. It's Kaluzhinskiy's responsibility to oversee investigations in all criminal cases handled by NABU detectives and have an impact on each of them. However, this influence is limited by the law and the unprecedented independence given to each of the 241 detectives.
During the interview, Andrei Kaluzhinsky tried to defend his procedural boundaries, while we attempted to challenge them. What resulted is for you to decide.
Blitz
What influences a person to choose honesty?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy:Upbringing, moral beliefs, and their stability.
Which type of corruption is more damaging for the state: domestic or at the highest levels of power?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy: Corruption at the highest levels.
Which case did you feel the most pressure in?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy:I experienced the most pressure in cases involving heads of law enforcement or influential oligarchs.
What is your biggest accomplishment in your profession?
Andriy Kaluzhinsky: We are achieving things that no one in Ukraine's law enforcement has before. We are holding accountable those who have never been punished.
What's the largest bribe you were offered to avoid punishment?
Andrei Kaluzhinskiy: Five million dollars to close the case regarding suspicion of Pan Zlochevsky.
Do you truly believe that corruption can be eliminated?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy: Not completely. But it can be reduced to a manageable level that won't harm the state's wellbeing.
What is the main tool in this situation?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy: Integrity in positions of power.
Do you think it's possible for those in power to be honest?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy: — Yes.
Is NABU still an outsider in the law enforcement system?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy: Sadly, for now, yes.
Why didn't you apply for the NABU director position?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy: There are several reasons.
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy about old cases, 'Lyubovich’s flash drive,' and Mikitas’ roof
'There won't be corruption, it doesn't exist now, because we are all united. Many corrupt officials left with their money.' This was recently said by President Volodymyr Zelensky. Andrey Vladimirovich, what are you doing in this office then?
— I believe the president used figurative language rather than speaking literally. Our research shows that corrupt officials continue to exist in the country. Unfortunately.
– Now, the topic of conversation is Judge Vovk. NABU detectives recorded Vovk's conversations, and his shameful case is now in the anti-corruption body. The District Administrative Court of Kyiv (OASK) was shut down, but the situation is not resolved. Firstly, because Vovk is still a judge. And secondly, those who protected him have not been held accountable. There is a “flash drive of Lyubovich”, which was physically taken from her deputy by the then Prosecutor General Irina Venediktova on July 16, 2020. At that time, Andrey Lyubovich had already prepared the suspicion of Vovk and was ready to sign it.
Based on our information, NABU initiated a case regarding Venediktova's unauthorized intervention. However, the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) conducted a parallel investigation in order to block the case. Are these cases currently being investigated? How frequently do other law enforcement agencies employ similar tactics to hinder NABU's progress?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy:– This indeed occurred. On the day when Lyubovich signed the suspicions for the judges of the OASK and attempted to enter the information into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations, he discovered that his flash drive was blocked. However, as far as I know, he reported the incident, and it was unblocked on the same day. So, there was an attempt to interfere, but it was unsuccessful. Because no flash drive can prevent the prosecutor from carrying out their duties. On that day, Lyubovich signed the suspicions, and the prosecutors from the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAP), along with the detectives, delivered them.
Head of NABU Detective Unit Andrei Kaluzhinskiy //NABU Press Office
Nonetheless, these suspicions were supposed to be presented by prosecutors from the Office of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine (OGPU). At that time, they were in charge, and the SAPO prosecutors were only part of the group. The interference was publicly revealed. There is even a recording on the internet in which the former head of the department of the Office of the Attorney General, following leadership instructions, prohibited his subordinates from participating in the presentation of the suspicion. Therefore, we had to quickly negotiate with the SAPO prosecutors so that they would take on this task and present the suspicion instead of the OGPU prosecutors.
—So NABU initiated the case?
– There are several actions to take. A case was filed regarding the interference in the activities of the OGPU prosecutor, and we are investigating it. There was also a case related to attempts to obstruct Lyubovich's official duties. SAP transferred this case to the State Bureau of Investigation, but the new head of the SAPO, Alexander Klimenko, recently requested it back and returned it to NABU. Additionally, the OGPU registered criminal proceedings related to the same incident and assigned the main investigative department of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) as the overseeing authority. However, these proceedings were also requested back from them at the initiative of the new head of the SAPO. We now have all these cases, and we will consider how and where to proceed.
—So, Irina Venediktova will be held accountable for her actions? Wherever she represents the state of Ukraine now?
— What I can say is that these cases are not finished, they will be looked into. The decision we make will depend on the proof we gather.
— Are similar cases happening in other organizations?
— Yes, there are many such facts: around 15–20% of all cases examined by NABU detectives have duplicates in other investigative organizations. This plan doesn't stop our investigations, but sometimes it makes our work much harder. If, for example, we start an investigation, and other authorities do the same for the same incident, then as part of their investigation, they can take away evidence, and then, for various reasons, not give us this evidence for quite a long time. But we are trying in every legal way to demand such investigations, and add the evidence they contain to our investigations. I cannot remember any case where a parallel investigation stopped us from finishing our investigation.
— NABU continued the second round in the Rotterdam+ case, which was recently dismissed. The number of participants increased from six to 21 people. Among them, there is no Poroshenko, Akhmetov, or Paseniuk. Why?
– First, we accused six people in the scheme. And they expanded the number to 15 suspects by adding members of the National Commission responsible for state regulation in the fields of energy and utilities, who approved the formula, but did not actively advance it. As for those who actively promoted it, we have seen the corpus delicti before and they were charged with article 364 of the Criminal Code – abuse of power or official position. But as for the others (nine more involved in the crime), then, based on the discussions with prosecutors, we concluded that their actions also constitute a crime, but a different one, namely, professional negligence (Article 367 of the Criminal Code). That's what they were charged with.
—And what about those three individuals that I mentioned?
—I cannot discuss the investigation in terms of individuals. I can say that suspicions have been expressed to those people for whom detectives and prosecutors have collected enough evidence. But the investigation is not done.
– Pan Mikitas appeared again in the information space – the mayor of Dnipro did his best: the developer was detained while trying to give Boris Filatov a bribe of 22 million euros. But Mikitas is a big fish that once escaped from your net. Not without the help of the deputy head of the presidential office, Oleg Tatarov, of course. When we talked with Artem Sytnik about the first case of Mikitas, we agreed that the Mikitas case could be no less cynical than the OASK in terms of significance and scale. This is not only the case of the apartments of the National Guard, but there are many more episodes related to the construction world in Kyiv. Mikitas spoke not only to detectives, he clearly told in his posts how his chief lawyer Tatarov, deputy Mayboroda… torn apart “Ukrbud”.
What's going on in the construction world of Kyiv and beyond? On December 14, 2021, the Shevchenkovsky court quietly closed the Tatarov case.
Head of NABU Detective Unit Andrei Kaluzhinskiy //NABU Press Office
Firstly, I don't agree that “Mikitas escaped from our net.” The criminal proceedings against that person are being considered in the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court. Secondly, regarding the other case you mentioned, as far as I know, the court didn't close it, but didn't extend the investigation, and then the prosecutor's office closed it. This decision can't be revised, unfortunately, because the pre-trial investigation period expired. According to the Criminal Procedure Code, missed pre-trial investigation deadlines can't be renewed. But at that time, this proceeding was taken from us and transferred to the SBU before the pre-trial period expired. As far as I know, the Security Service still applied to the court for an extension of the deadlines, but the court didn't extend it. In such circumstances, either the case materials need to be opened with subsequent sending of the indictment to the court, or it needs to be closed.
“Mikitas' testimonies are a springboard for a jump that can end in completely different ways”… But as for the situation with the expert and Tatarov, everything has already happened and proven,” these are the words of Sytnyk. That is, the SBU, not paying attention to the fact that NABU had already proved everything, preferred to close the case rather than go to court for a guilty verdict? body of pre-trial investigation (SBU in this case. – I.V.), these are the powers of the prosecutor. The law gives him five days to make a decision from the moment the court refuses to extend the pre-trial investigation. However, he made no decision. Why he did this, I don't know. (Speech about the Prosecutor of the Office of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine Andriy Hrytsan. — I.V.)
—But these are not at all the signals that society should receive from a state declaring the fight against corruption.
—I can say that if we are not given a legal way to complete the work , then, of course, it upsets us. We are taking all possible measures within our powers to prevent this from happening.
— And what business do Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov go to NABU lately? There are also questions about the searches that took place at one of them in Dnipro last week.
—I will not comment, since the active stage of the pre-trial investigation and investigative actions are now underway.</p
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy about Kaufman's bunker, Trukhanov's karma and schemes of local feudal lords
– If you look at the local level, then all our regions and regional centers are feudal estates. Somewhere more, somewhere less, but Kaufman and Granovsky in Odessa completely lost the coast. How long have these gentlemen businessmen been in development?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy:– Detectives received information about the illegal influence of certain individuals on the entire city and regional authorities about a year and a half ago. This influence was used for the purpose of personal enrichment of these persons in a criminal way. Detectives began to develop and received evidence that, in our opinion, confirms that these individuals actually influenced the adoption of all decisions of the local authorities and actively used this influence. I probably agree with you – each of the regions has its own more or less influential players, but we have no information that someone “monopolized” local authorities as much as in Odessa.
– Kaufman and Granovsky got in trouble in Odessa, while the NABU is still investigating the case of the criminal group Galanternik, who founded a large business using government funds and Odessa's land. Why did the crime reoccur in the same city? Is it due to lack of punishment, too much freedom under the current government, or because you investigated the first case poorly?
– Along with the previous case involving a criminal group in Odessa, which NABU is still investigating, there are several more cases. We believe we have enough evidence to hold top local government officials responsible for corruption. But at the time, for example, the case against the current mayor of Odessa and other officials related to the Krayan plant was sent to court before the VACS was created. So, we sent it to the local court (Malinovsky District Court of Odessa) which handled it quickly and acquitted our defendants. Perhaps this also sends a message that deters others from similar actions. However, the acquittal was later overturned, and now it's being considered in the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court. I hope VAKS will make a fair decision.
– Kaufman and Granovsky used a bunker to prevent wiretapping and had 100 people in their personal security service… It's like some kind of cosa nostra.
– Indeed, the suspects tried to scheme as much as possible, they had special rooms with wiretapping protection. They conducted important meetings there to avoid being documented by law enforcement agencies.
– Before the local elections of 2020, ZN.UA conducted the “Country on the Shelves” project, where we exposed everything, including the business stories of each regional center. So, the corrupt practices in Odessa, like in other cities, were not surprising to us. We were expecting action from you. But two years have passed and the scheme is still in operation. There have been wiretaps, arrests, searches, confiscation of equipment and documents… Where else could these investigations lead? The regional administration, which is part of the presidential vertical, is also involved.
NABU Press Office
— We believe that we have gathered sufficient evidence against the persons who were informed of the suspicion. However, the pre-trial investigation is ongoing.
—And Trukhanov continues to govern the city.
—The justice system needs to function. If it's confirmed that a person committed a crime, they must be held accountable. And if it's not confirmed, all charges should be dropped. Currently, we have numerous ongoing investigations in Odessa related to various schemes. Detectives are also monitoring the potential use of similar schemes in other regions.
– And what patterns are you already applying to any mass? Deputies on high salaries, buying out utility companies…
“Our corrupt officials are very clever. They buy a small area of real estate and grab large pieces of land from communal property for this real estate. We are investigating this scheme and some people, including the organizer Galanternik, and 15 other suspects such as the mayor Gennady Trukhanov, deputy mayor Petr Ryabokon, and others, are already facing criminal charges. – I.V.
Companies can build communal property plots at a low cost for a community, but a criminal group can make millions of dollars from these services (depending on the size and location of the land). Developers pay the market price for the right to build, but not to local governments. The huge amounts of money make the position of the “watcher” more attractive than the fear of being caught. This fear actually encourages allocating more resources to avoid being caught by law enforcement.
There are also joint venture schemes where commercial enterprises sign contracts with utilities and get all the income from their property, leaving the community with nothing or with losses and debts. Often, this property is later transferred to certain people at a reduced cost.
And, perhaps, the easiest scheme is the sale of real estate or property complexes of enterprises at a reduced cost.
— I know that Boris Filatov submitted several applications to NABU specifically about land histories, but you don’t take on everything. Why? Because you have little strength? Because you are not sure about the effectiveness of this or that investigation, but you need to show the result?
— We have clear work criteria. If we see signs of a crime related to our jurisdiction, then we start a criminal case and investigate. If we do not see enough data indicating the existence of such a crime, we do not pursue the case.
And the forces are actually very limited. Currently, there are 241 detectives in the main division according to the staffing table. There are ten more vacancies. More than ten detectives have been mobilized in the Armed Forces of Ukraine and other paramilitary formations. That is, in total, about 220 detectives are now working throughout the country. Each detective is responsible for investigating crimes and writing up charges. Only 14-16 detectives work in each of the NABU territorial departments in Kharkiv, Odesa and Lvov. Compare this with other law enforcement agencies, where the staff of investigators has thousands of people.
NABU Press Office
—Have any detectives been injured in the war?</p
—Sadly, one detective has been seriously injured in the Kharkov area. It's possible that he won't be fit for military duty. I hope he can return to work at NABU, but I'm not sure if that will be possible.
—Did you also go on a business trip? What was the purpose?
– When the Russian Federation began full-scale aggression, around 30 detectives stayed in Kyiv to defend the capital. On February 25, the detectives, along with National Bureau's Special Operations Directorate, were sent to protect a crucial facility in Kyiv's government quarter. Later, they collaborated with the SBU to identify saboteurs, traitors, and collaborators. They also worked with the SBU in conducting measures among the population leaving the occupied territories, along with other tasks.
In parallel with this, they arranged to receive information from various sources about the places of concentration of equipment and manpower of the enemy, which was transferred to the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense, as well as directly to military units and formations that needed this information. The result is a confirmed defeat of dozens of columns of equipment of the Russian occupation forces, places of concentration of personnel and weapons, and the like. In addition, cases of our troops falling into ambushes prepared for them by the invaders were prevented. We also directly participated in aerial reconnaissance, moved into the “grey zone”, even came under artillery fire.
Later, I and some other detectives were assigned to the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense. Some detectives worked at the Interdepartmental Coordination Center for special units of the security and defense sector, while others worked in the temporarily occupied territories, details of which can't be disclosed at this time. According to reports from both NABU and GUR, five marines were evacuated from behind enemy lines.
—When NABU and the entire anti-corruption bloc were established, they aimed to positively change the law enforcement system. By dealing with the Odessa case, you are signaling the right message to the society and local elites. Is it time to take the same approach with some of them?
– From the beginning, we have been sending a message to all elites not to engage in such behavior. We strive to constantly increase the pace.
On relationships with other security forces, problematic expertise, and the Bankova factor
—You mentioned that NABU still feels like an outsider in the law enforcement system. Is there a risk that the system will change NABU, rather than the other way around?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy:We have some cooperation with various law enforcement agencies. It's not true that all law enforcement agencies are full of scoundrels. There are always individuals trying to achieve positive results, which is the purpose of all law enforcement agencies. We receive information and collaborate with them to achieve successful cases. Our relationship with other law enforcement agencies is not as confrontational as it was three years ago.
—Why? Have the people within the system changed, or has the government changed?
— How to respond correctly… Previously, we experienced direct pressure from law enforcement agencies like the SBU, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and the Prosecutor General's Office. They disrupted our operations, falsely accused our employees, and initiated baseless criminal proceedings to intimidate us. It was common for all law enforcement agencies to target us, sometimes using illegal means, but fortunately, I don't see that happening now. At least they don’t openly interfere with our work.
— NABU has always found it hard to conduct examinations.
— Despite the existing issues with expert examinations, NABU has the option to establish its own expert institutions for more effective pre-trial investigation, instead of relying on the experts from other controlled institutions. This provision needs to be ensured in the law on forensic examination, and it is already being discussed with international partners.
—Who has a greater impact on the law enforcement system—Smirnov or Tatarov?
— I can't answer this question, as it's not my role to provide such assessments… What's important for a comprehensive reform are systemic changes based on political will.
—And when you look at the Office of the Prosecutor General or pass by, do you feel partners there or not so much?
– I choose not to respond.
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy about envelopes to deputies, the factor of the Prosecutor General and the quality of political elites
— In a previous interview with Artem Sytnik in 2020, we discussed the practice of providing envelopes to current deputies under the 5-10-15 program. The rates of the 'assistance fund' for deputies for loyalty during voting were significantly increased, and there were discussions about the '20-30-50' program. However, systematic information leaks and the inability to find a witness who will testify actually hampered investigations. This was mentioned by the former director of NABU, and according to our information, under Sytnik, the Bureau lacked only a few weeks to bring this matter to a conclusion. Is this true?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy:I cannot confirm or deny this information. However, I can explain the difficulty in holding people's deputies accountable. Only the Prosecutor General can file criminal charges against a deputy. We have encountered troubling precedents, such as when materials were sent to register criminal proceedings against a people's deputy for extorting a bribe of 40 million hryvnia, but the request for registration was denied.
This is an extreme and blatant situation for individuals in law enforcement. Essentially, the person involved protected the deputy from facing criminal proceedings. (This refers to the case of the ruling party “Servant of the People” deputy Pavel Khalimon, who was shielded at that time by Prosecutor General I. Venediktova. – I.V.). Eventually, after this incident became public, the case was registered, but the deputy naturally stopped engaging with our applicant. The operation failed.
There were other instances suggesting that there was a 'leakage of information' indicating that we were working for a specific member of parliament. Therefore, it is clear that the law should remove the Prosecutor General's monopoly on entering information about deputies into the ERDR. The head of the SAPO, Alexander Klymenko, also mentioned this in his interview.
So, you do not have access to places where corruption, which is crucial for the state, has already developed. What are we discussing then?
<img src="/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/90f8d756eaea453015992649c612d0eb.jpg" class="wpg_image" title="Head of the main NABU detective unit Andrey Kaluzhinskiy" width="1920" height="1280" alt="Head Head of NABU Detectives Andrey Kaluzhinsky- These cases that I mentioned occurred under the previous leadership of the Office of the Prosecutor General. We have not had such cases with the current leadership. But I cannot rule out that they may occur. To mitigate such risks, it would be logical and appropriate to delegate these powers to the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office.
Furthermore, the current standard contradicts the concept of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which states that any investigator, upon receiving information about a crime, must register the criminal proceedings and initiate a pre-trial investigation without even verifying this information. If the legislator wants to provide additional guarantees to certain individuals, there is a special procedure for holding them accountable. In my opinion, this is logical, as certain groups of individuals should have extra protection due to the high risks of unlawful interference in their activities. However, this should not occur at the stage of registering criminal proceedings. The mere act of initiating a case does not in any way limit their rights or freedoms. The start of the investigation is documented, and then the law enforcement agency conducts an investigation and reaches conclusions. It is at this point that guarantees should come into play, where a specific person in the prosecutor's office should assess the sufficiency of the grounds.
—There was a parliament member from the mono-majority, Anton Polyakov, who claimed that deputies were being paid in parliament. Unfortunately, he is no longer here.
I cannot disclose specific names, but in general, many high-profile claims turn out to be just that when investigated. It's like saying that somewhere out there someone is giving something to someone. It's very similar to how grandmothers discuss the news on a bench.
— Are you referring to Polyakov now or to Sytnik, who said that an investigation is underway and only plums interfere?</p
— I cannot say the same about Sytnik; he may have known something that I am not aware of.
— Is this possible?
– Theoretically – it is possible, since we have units that do not report to me. I mean those people who claim that they know: someone is passing something to someone else. When asked about the specifics such as when, where, to whom, under what circumstances, and if they are willing to assist, they begin to hesitate. Often, such public statements are merely for PR purposes.
Even the potential for corruption in the state legislature is a warning to everyone that anything could happen.
The government must really make it impossible. Also, individuals making important decisions should be paid enough to live comfortably. Currently, officials making billion-dollar decisions may not be able to support their families on their salaries. This makes them susceptible to the temptation of accepting large sums of money for a decision, signature, or vote. The quality of justice in our country has not changed, except in the anti-corruption agencies. NAPC, SAP, NABU, and VAKS were established and staffed differently from the SBI, resulting in different outcomes.
That's why I believe this is just one aspect. The key is political determination and the certainty of punishment. But eliminating corruption in power cannot be achieved solely through punitive measures, especially by a small unit like ours. We can identify corruption in specific areas, but this must be followed by administrative, organizational, and political actions. The system must be restructured, as simply catching bribe-takers will not completely wipe out bribery.
NABU Press Office //Head of the Main Detective Unit of NABU Andrey Kaluzhinskiy
Are we discussing the quality of the current political elites now?
In general, we are talking about establishing a system and the level of acceptance of corruption, which I believe is still quite high in society, among the elites, and within the authorities. Those accused of corruption in Ukraine are still widely accepted, promoted, interviewed by the media, and invited to public events. An example is when we apprehended the head of the investigative department of a district department of the State Fiscal Service in Kyiv, who was suspected of accepting a $36,000 bribe in July 2016. During the investigation and court proceedings, he was promoted and eventually led the investigation unit of the entire city of Kyiv and then even worked in the main investigative department. Such situations should not occur at all.
Regarding new cases, such as 'Big Construction' and customs from the tax office.
We were just discussing old cases, what about new ones? What are the corrupt Category A officials in khakis earning now?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy: Unfortunately, the trends have not changed much. There are always attempts to embezzle budgetary funds and people accepting bribes. It's nothing new, but now it appears extremely cynical… Some steal money while others sacrifice their lives.
– In any government, there are always well-known people who everyone knows about, except law enforcement. Let me tell you the names that everyone is talking about regarding the budget: Golik, Timoshenko, Reznichenko, Arakhamia… Haven't you heard?
Of course, you can use the usual language pattern, they say, an investigation is underway, or you can give hope to the society right now.
– Hearing or knowing and proving in terms of criminal procedure are completely different things. It is one thing to prove according to the standards of conditional journalistic investigation, to formulate some ideas about certain circumstances in society. It is quite another thing to bring it to the point where you first report a suspicion, and then the court passes the appropriate verdict. This is first. Secondly, regarding certain things that you said, the information was public: the criminal proceedings were registered by the prosecutor's office, it came to us, and we are investigating it.
And when I said that there are schemes for taking over budget funds, this is already based on the fact that we react to these schemes within the framework of our powers. And, believe me, what is in the media, what journalists talk about and write about, we all know and see it too. And all the facts that may indicate the presence of corpus delicti, we study and give them a proper assessment. I will not talk about specific facts and names, but we do not close our eyes to the corruption processes taking place within the boundaries of our jurisdiction.
– Please name a few more key most popular schemes that feed our cynical corrupt officials.
– For example, the supply of goods or services to the state at inflated prices through various “shim” companies.</p
“By the way, I can also add here the name of the famous Fistal dynasty, who both before the war and now buy medical equipment as part of the same “Great Construction”. Enormous funds are washed out of the budget in wartime. Equipment on a large scale is delivered many times more expensive than purchased.
NABU Press Office //Head of the Main Unit of NABU Detectives NABU detectives Andrei Kaluzhinskiy
— We know about such facts, they are being investigated. By and large, such schemes exist in all areas. Cases with medical equipment are just some of them.
Another fairly common scheme is to overestimate the amount of work performed. Sometimes there is a purchase on paper of non-existent things that are not supplied to the state. These are the main and most common trends that we identify in our line of work.
— What level of officials are you currently developing for these schemes?
— Most of our developments cover senior officials.
— Are these ministers, deputy ministers? The Ministry of Defense, for example, are you interested in? There are also bright surnames here – Sharapov, Shapovalov.
– You understand that I cannot name names.
— And what about customs? There is still a marker – Pan Pavlyuk. Odessa is closed due to the war, but the west of Ukraine is hard at work. Lviv, Transcarpathian, Volyn regions… Checkpoints Krakovets, Shehyni… Nothing changed. Why? What are you doing to change this, and when can we expect results?
– We have already tried to understand why it hasn't changed. Some people decide that they can continue their previous actions during the war, and others do not stop them. Are there customs issues? Yes. When can we expect results? We are gathering evidence. Once we have enough, society will know about it. Officials, especially from law enforcement agencies, are well informed about their weaknesses and are taking measures to make it harder for us to find these weaknesses and document their illegal actions. There are probably more such officials than 220 detectives investigating top corruption in the country. Despite limited resources, we do not stop. However, if the NABU detective staff were larger, we could cover much more and get results faster.
— What about conversion centers?
— This is more related to the Bureau of Economic Security. But if we are discussing corruption in the tax administration, then it may be of interest for our investigations if certain criteria are met.
– So, you are involved in blocking tax invoices? This is a big problem right now. I recently heard Deputy Minister of Agrarian Policy, Pan Vysotsky, tell farmers that officials can do nothing about this and that anti-corruption agencies should work. The state does not listen to the farmers at all, the land has been taken away, and even high-ranking officials are blocking it. This is another future challenge for Ukraine.
—Actually, the easiest and most effective way to solve this issue is administratively. The tax service management sees everything that happens in the regions and can influence it.
—And if they don't, then you're interested? They are just throwing money into the shadows. People want to work honestly, but they are simply not allowed to.
—So, the intentions here are not entirely pure. And we have cases of corruption involving tax authority representatives.
– At what stage out of a hundred possible percent are these cases? Farmers are not alone. The disgraced Nasirov was suspected of taking a bribe back in 2015. By that logic, will the tax authorities be responsible for the massive extortion of money from exporters in 2029? >— This is a valid question.
— It's not like a construction project, where we can say it's 66% complete.
— We have gathered evidence, but it's not a measurable degree of readiness.
—It's not measured in that way.
—Measure it competently.
— We have prosecuted seven customs officials as part of the investigation into cases involving a well-known Odessa smuggler. Among them are the head of the Kyiv customs and his deputy, as well as the director of the department for the administration of customs payments of the State Fiscal Service. There are still ongoing developments. As for the tax service, we have prosecuted the former head of the State Fiscal Service and the head of one of the departments. We are also investigating other corruption schemes involving tax service officials. I cannot provide details yet, but I hope that there will soon be results in the form of suspicions against those involved.
— After ten months of war, the initial impact has diminished. However, the system of dishonesty remains unchanged. Is there an example of people changing? Before, they behaved poorly, but now, during the war, are they doing good?
—I can give an example of one of the accused in our case, who turned into an accuser. He assisted in exposing a criminal plan involving a group of bribe-takers, and then he joined the fight. Initially, he fought near Kyiv, and now he is in the eastern direction. I have a sense that this person has realized the need for a real change in life. There are individuals like that. Unfortunately, the system as a whole does not change.
— Regarding accusers. Evgeny Shevchenko. By the way, he was the first to write a post about Kaufman and immediately referenced Bankova. How should this be perceived? Is this James Bond or an adventurer?
—Eugene is an accuser in several criminal cases that we investigated. As for his public activities, that is his responsibility – our institution has no involvement in it. Yevgeny Shevchenko is a private individual, not an employee or agent of NABU.
— Do people approach NABU about pressure and bribery of members of parliament when voting for bill No. 5655, which, due to the strong lobbying of the head of the ruling party, Elena Shulyak, perpetuates corruption in the urban planning sector?
—As far as I know, not yet.
About the competition, the team atmosphere, and expectations from the new leader
— What is the situation of the NABU team currently? Has Gizo Uglava succeeded in maintaining team unity, or are there different centers of influence, including former director Sytnyk?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy: — In my opinion, the Bureau has not felt any significant changes after the end of the director's tenure. The team remains intact. The NABU team is unified and singular. We do not practice forming separate teams. This is one of NABU's distinctive features, and I hope it will continue under the new director.
NABU press office //Head of the main unit of detectives of NABU Andriy Kaluzhinsky
— There are very few strong candidates from NABU participating in the competition. Why did you not compete? Do you lack confidence in yourself or NABU? Or is it something else?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy:— I have confidence in NABU and in myself. However, firstly, I do not wish to give unnecessary grounds for assumptions that I was appointed due to my proximity to Sytnik. Secondly, working as an official at such a high level in Ukraine is highly politicized. In my opinion, to hold the position of director, one needs a certain level of 'masochism' that I do not possess.
— Why?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy:– When an official tries to do something beneficial and only receives endless criticisms in return, it truly seems like masochism. The same applies to the level of public exposure, which is currently excessive for me in that role.
Well, the third reason is purely rational. Even if I had made it to the top three finalists, I am 99.9% certain that I still would not have been chosen. Therefore, I see no point in participating. I would learn a lot about myself, and not just me, from the media, all sorts of fabricated materials, and so on. And the outcome would still be the same. So, I fail to find a reason to do so.
—What leader are you waiting for? There are different versions of how the authorities prescribed the conditions for their candidate in the law. But can NABU be shaken if a person comes who will try to nullify all your achievements?
Andrey Kaluzhinskiy: — We all hope for a respectable leader. If a person is dishonest and begins to engage in sabotage, then the team will not allow everything to be sharply deployed, broken. Of course, the collective will resist illegal actions. However, the authority of the director is still enough to nullify all our developments over time. But we all hope that this will not happen and that a worthy and professional person will become the head of NABU.
Irina Venediktova
NABU is engaged in the waste of state funds by Zelensky's company
Cold revenge . Will Kholodnitsky put the chief detective of NABU?
