There were multiple cases which were opened against Mikolay Zlochevsky, owner of Burisma Holdings, some of which blurred the lines between investigations and who was investigating which case. The PGU under Yarema and Shokin had failed to pursue the cases, otherwise then complaints of tax evasion which, if paid on time, prevented any type of imprisonment.
The National Anti-corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) attempted to pursue but on at least one occasion, was impeded by the Special Anti-corruption prosecutor, a man appointed by Shokin.
The major criminal cases against MZ were allegations of illicit enrichment/ money launderingn which was a case linked to the UK SFO, tax evasion, the illegal issuance natural resources licenses, and embezzlement of state funds while in office.
The National Anti-corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) attempted to pursue but on at least one occasion, was impeded by the Special Anti-corruption prosecutor, a man appointed by Shokin.
The major criminal cases against MZ were allegations of illicit enrichment/ money launderingn which was a case linked to the UK SFO, tax evasion, the illegal issuance natural resources licenses, and embezzlement of state funds while in office.
THE UNPURSUED BURISMA HOLDINGS ILLICIT ENRICHMENT/ MONEY LAUNDERING CASE
The PGU never appropriately pursued a criminal case into illicit enrichment/ money laundering and worked to obstruct the UK's case on the subject. According to a letter issued to the People's Deputy in late February 2015, soon after Shokin's appointment, the evidence that they relied upon to open the criminal case against MZ had fully come from the UK SFO investigation. Per the letter issued by Shokin's PGU:
The decision by the UK courts allowed the PGU under Yarema and Shokin to not pursue a case of illicit enrichment or money laundering against MZ but instead transform it into one of investigating if any personal tax evasion existed related to the 23 Million dollars in the London bank account. This faux "criminal case" was soon merged with a criminal tax evasion case involving a subsidiary or Burisma Holdings and then discharged at the same time the back taxes plus "penalty" was met.
TIMELINE
The PGU under Yarema had begun in December to conduct its own investigation to see if there was "rationalization" for naming MZ as a suspect in the crime the UK alleged. The case was almost immediately transferred to the MIA to conduct the investigation. Then on Dec 10th, just days into their investigation, the UK office sent them notification "that the British law enforcer had fully proven the fact of illicit enrichment by Zlochevsky M.V. in the amount of about 23 mln USD and intentional failure to declare this income in their country." It was the SFO statement that they used to both name MZ as a suspect and seize his assets. That information they relied upon was later determine by a UK Court as "unproven and invalid evidence, mainly based on assumptions and speculation which were not confirmed during the trial........ court being misled regarding the illegality of actions Zlochevsky M.V."
The author is implying that the information the PGU relied upon to take the case to the criminal level was invalid because the UK lied to them.
"As a result of studying the materials provided by the Ukrainian side, the British court decided not to take them into account as in its opinion the documents were based on the data submitted to the General Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine by the competent authorities of the UK. These data were not confirmed by the court and mostly were distorted by the UK law enforcement officers."
TIMELINE
2002
Mykola Zlovchevsky opened Burisma Holdings alongside Mykola Lisin. Lisin died in 2011 and Zlovchevky became the sole owner.
2010
President Yanukovych took office. Vitaly Kasko, who had been part of the PGU, quit as a result of Yanukovych taking over. Corruption hit a high under Yanukovych.
2010 - 2012
Mykola Zlovchevsky held government offices within the Yanukovych administration; the positions allowed him to assign gas licenses to many of the subsidiaries within the Burisma Holdings group. In all, Zlochevsky's company obtained 9 gas licenses and his company's production rate raised times seven. The gas licenses were later the subject of investigations.
11/2013 - 2/2014
The Ukrainian people begin the Maidan revolution, a series of protests against Yanukovych's decision to go back on his word to sign an agreement to bring the Ukraine closer to the European Union. Law Enforcement push back to the protests soon turned to increasing acts of violence and dozens of protesters are murdered. The revolution ended in February when Yanukovych and his top allies were forced out of the government. Yanukovych was assisted by Putin to escape into Russia.
2/24/2014
The Ukrainian government lacked officials in high offices following the Maidan Revolution.
Oleh Makhnitskyi, a Ukrainian politician an attorney, agreed to serve as the interim Prosecutor General. Kasko rejoined the PGU; during the revolution, he defended activists who Yanukovych's PGU pulled into court for prosecution. Shokin is a first deputy in the PGU.
THE BRITISH COURT CASE: TIMELINE
After receiving an alert from a bank, the SFO froze Zlochevksy's accounts because it believed the $23 million contained within belonged to the people. However, due to the PGU under Yarema, the case was lost and the assets unfrozen. Once the money was lost, the Britt's had no purpose in pursuing the case.
3/11/2014 & 3/14/14
BNP Paribas received a request from Zlochevsky's attorney to close accounts totaling $23 million dollars and transfer the balance to a bank in Cyprus. The bank delayed the transfer and alerted the UK Serious Fraud Offices of concerns.
3/22/2014
The UK SFO initiated a money laundering investigation against Mykola Zlochevsky. The money, or part of it, was believed to have come from Sergiy Kurchenko who recently had international sanctions applied against him.
April 14, 2014
In a special court hearing involving only the SFO, SFO attorneys argued "there were reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant [Zlochevsky] had engaged in criminal conduct in Ukraine and the funds in the BNP account were believed to be the proceeds of such criminal conduct” The SFO argued Zlochevksy's position as a politician and businessman gave "rise to a clear inference of a willful and dishonest exploitation of a direct conflict of interest by a man holding an important public office such as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in him............. the complicated pattern of offshore holding companies established when he was still a serving minister was effectively to conceal his beneficial ownership of Burisma”
May 20, 2014
The SFO received 6,170 electronic financial documents from BNP Paribas related to Zlochevsky's account.
6/2014
At the time, Vitaly Kasko was head of the international department of the PGU; the SFO sent him their documents and request for documents from the PGU. Kasko relayed the message to his boss and waited for their reply.
6/7/2014
Petro Poroshenko was elected president of the Ukaine and assumed office. Poroshenko promised to end corruption within the government and the PGU.
6/18/2014
After three months in office, Oleh Makhnitskyi requested to resign from the role. Poroshenko agreed and dismissed him.
6/19/2014
Pres. Poroshenko appointed Vitaly Yarema as the new prosecutor general of the Ukraine.
8/5/2014
The PGU upon Viately Kasko's report initiated case No 42014000000000805 regarding allegations of illicit enrichment and money laundering in especially large sizes committed by Zlochevskyi. However, as admitted to in a February 2015 letter from Shokin's PGU, no investigation into the matter occurred until many months later.
8/22/2014
The SFO provided 22 documents to Zlochevsky per disclosure rules. These documents and later ones become an issue for the UK SFO because it missed 10-11 additional documents which should had been disclosed; the fail to disclose was used alongside other factors, including a lack of evidence, to dismiss the case against MZ.
11/20/2014
Despite multiple attempts, the PGU had not provided all the documentation requested by the UK SFO. As the liaison for international investigations, Kasko repeatedly was receiving the requests and the notice that items were not being provided. He addressed his boss, Deputy Attorney General Oleg Zalisko, directly in a letter.
Kasko later described the correspondence as the catalyst which resulted in him taking charge of much of the effort to get the required documents to the SFO. Bad actors within the PGU continued to work against the efforts to help the UK win the case. Soon after Kasko took charge, the investigation was transferred out of the hands of the PGU.
12/2/2014
Investigator Kravets, a subordinate of Deputy Attorney General Zalisko provided a letter to the London Court stating that five investigations had been open against Zlochevsky between Dec 19,2012 and August 6, 2014 including the SFO's but not delivered because there was no grounds for prosecution. "[Zlochevkshy] was never named as a suspect for embezzlement or indeed any other offence, let alone one related to the exercise of improper influence in the grant of exploration and production licences."
12/4/2014
Without reason, First Deputy Prosecutor General Nikolai Gerasimyuk transferred the case against Zlochevsky to the Ministry of Internal Affairs for Investigation. There was no evidence of any investigation being conducted while the case was with the MIA. Viktor Shokin was responsible for the oversight of the investigation at the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
12/25/2014
The PGU received a letter from the US Administration warning the PGU of negative consequences if the PGU continued to block the UK SFO's investigation. At the time, Joe Biden was already the US admin liaison to the Ukraine and Hunter Biden had been on Burisma's board for months. The US push for the Ukraine to assist in an investigation against Zlochevsky allegedly using his company for money laundering did not fit with the claim Joe Biden was trying to block investigations into the matter.
12/29/2014
Following the US warning, the PGU transferred the case back from the MIA to the PGU. On the same day, it also issued a notification that Zlochevsky was a suspect in a criminal complaint.
12/30/2014
An Ukraine court ordered a freeze on the already frozen Zlochevsky London bank accounts.
1/21/2015
A London court reversed the original seizure order of the account and dismissed the new PGU order citing in part the Dec 2 letter and the lack of evidence while neglecting to consider the lack of cooperation of the PGU.
Soon after, Zlochevsky moved the money to a Cyprus bank.
The UK SFO case was defeated but the PGU still had the August 6th, 2014 case it had opened to contend with (No42014000000000805). However, instead of properly pursuing it as a criminal matter, it was mishandled as an investigation into personal taxes.
8/2014 - 12/28/2014
Shokin was part of Yarema's team and had exposure to the opened case involving Burisma Holdings and MZ. As indicated in a December 2, 2014 UK court document, the PGU would not consider MZ a suspect in a criminal investigation regarding illicit enrichment/ money laundering.
12/4/2014
Yarema's PGU transferred case No42014000000000805 ("805") to the Ministry of the Internal Affairs; Viktor Shokin provided oversight over investigations within the MIA. The case was not pursued via the MIA.
12/25/2014
The PGU received a letter from the Obama administration warning it of negative consequences if it did not cooperate with the UK investigation into Burisma Holdings. Joe Biden was the connection to the Ukraine and Hunter Biden on Burisma Holdings board at the time.
12/28/2014
The pressure from the US worked and the case was transferred back to the PGU and the PGU provided documentation to the London court naming Zlochevsky a suspect in criminal case. However, shortly before being named a suspect in a criminal case, Zlochevsky fled the Ukraine.
12/29/2014
The Pechersk district court of Kiev issued an order to for the London bank to seize Zlochevsky's already seized bank account. However, little was done by the PGU to help the Brit's maintain the original seizure order nor were criminal charges filed against Zlochevsky in Ukrainian courts despite creating a document naming him a suspect for the UK SFO case. Ultimately, both seizure orders were dismissed by a London court based on a lack of evidence that the Zlochevsky bank account was linked to criminal conduct.
The Pechersk district court of Kiev also allowed the Ukraine to seize other assets not related to the UK SFO court case. Among those assets were several land plots of Zlochevsky, a house of 900 square meters, and a Rolls-Royce car.
Jan 21st, 2015
The UK court case was lost and the 23 Million in the London bank was transferred to Cyprus, thus ending the UK SFO case. The associated Ukrainian case initiated in August 2014 remained open but was not being investigated as a criminal case by the Yarema PGU which Shokin was a part of.
February 2015 - February 2016
The August case into illicit enrichment and money laundering was never pursued under Shokin. Shokin's PGU never took the pertinent task of investigating where the funds in his London bank accounts originated from or follow-up on the statement that $20 million was provided by offshore companies owned by Sergey Kurchenko. Kurchenko had been under EU sanctions since March 2014 for embezzlement and money laundering.
February 27, 2015
The people's deputy of Ukraine requested information as to case "805" regarding MZ. The PGU replied with a review of the UK SFO investigation, implied it was mislead by the UK to believe that evidence existed of MZ's guilt, and it based the decision to name MZ as a suspect in a criminal investigation based upon alleged misstated facts by the UK SFO. According to the response, the PGU had not investigated MZ but instead was relying upon what the UK SFO told them and allegedly, the information was distorted. Nonetheless, the PGU claimed "pretrial investigations into the criminal proceedings [were] ongoing," however it had yet to commence any investigation into the matter.
https://antac.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Letter-of-General-Prosecutors-Office-1715-32844-14-from-March-12-2015-addressed-to-MP-Sergiy-Leschenko.pdf
March, 2015 - December 2015
Shokin's PGO had not pursued the investigation into the illicit enrichment money laundering case 805 against Zlochevsky.
September 2015
The Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office was launched. The role of the office was to oversee corruption cases and to take them to trial, primarily those being investigated by pre-existing National Anti-corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU). The office was supposed to be independent, however Shokin stacked it with operators favorable to him. Control of the SAP gave Shokin some control over NABU snd whether NABU's investigations would go to trial.
Source: Shokin is trying to make the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office dependent, experts say
January 15, 2016
Upon a request by the People's Deputy of Ukraine, the PGU transferred the cases against Zlovechevsky involving illicit enrichment and money laundering to NABU. (the cases had went nowhere since the February 2015 letter) Source: GPU referred the case of ex-Minister Zlochevsky to the Anti-Corruption Bureau (1/15/16)
January 29, 2016
Several land plots of Zlochevsky, a house of 900 square meters, and a Rolls-Royce car subject to the Deb 25th temporary seizure order are released by the Pechersk district court of Kiev. The explanation provided was that the "official suspicion was not directly handed over to Zlochevsky, but was transferred through a lawyer." Source: The Pechersk court lifted the arrest of the property of ex-Minister of Ecology Zlochevsky
JANUARY 31st, 2016
The National Anti-corruption Bureau of the Ukraine (NABU) takes over the investigations into Zlochevksy, citing, "The director of NABU also said that investigators from the Prosecutor General’s Office did not do enough to investigate Zlochevsky’s cases...... "Little has been done in the case. To finally say whether he has a judicial perspective, it is necessary to carry out a certain amount of work," Sytnik emphasized" Source: NABU investigates the removal of arrests from the accounts of ex-Minister of Ecology Zlochevsky
February 2, 2016
Following NABU's announcement that it is was going to investigate why the property from the December 29th order was released, the PGU filed to re-seize the MZ's property.
February 16th,
Shokin was asked to resign but took a long leave of absence to delay or possibly prevent his dismissal.
March 29, 2016
After returning on March 16th, RADA finally votes on the matter on March 29th and Shokin Poroshenko's 2/19 request is backed by RADA.
April 2016 - November 2016Lutsenko was appointed the new Prosecutor General. The Burisma Holdings Case had gained national attention and had yet been put to bed due to the failure of Shokin to investigate if MZ used his company for illicit enrichment or money laundering as noted in the UK allegation. The source of the funds in the London Bank account was never appropriately investigated. Instead of doing the preliminary investigation, Lutsenko gave the appearance the case was satisfied through blurring the lines with allegations of tax evasion. The case was closed on November 1st, 2016.
"it is hard to trace any evident logic in the actions of Ukrainian investigators who combined the episode of company’s tax evasion in 2016 with the criminal proceedings on illicit enrichment and money laundering allegedly committed by Zlochevskyi in 2010-2014." Transparency International.Per a letter dated Dec 2016, a letter that covered the time frame in which Shokin would had investigated Burisma for illicit enrichment/ money laundering,
"...your appeal regarding results of the pretrial investigation in criminal proceedings No. 42014000000000805.......As a result of the pretrial investigation in the indicated criminal proceedings on suspicion Zlochevskiy M.V. in a criminal offense under part 3 of Art of 368-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, no violations of tax legislation on the completeness and timeliness of payment of the personal income tax to the budget during relevant period by Zlochevski M.V. were established......The findings of the Shevchenko District Inspection of MD of SFS in Kyiv city regarding absence of violations of tax laws by Zlochevsky M.V. were also confirmed by the decision of the Central Criminal Court of the UK on 21 January 2015 as well as expert opinion made as the result of the economic forensic examination dated 6 February 2015.......Given the above, on 01 November 2016 the prosecutor in the proceedings ordered to close the criminal proceedings."The criminal complaint for illicit enrichment/ money laundering against MZ was not investigated, just as what has been stated by multiple sources. Neither Yarema, Shokin, nor Lutsenko looked into where the funds in Zlochevksy's account came from and if the 20 million allegedly linked to Sergiy Kurchenko was part of a money laundering scheme.
(additional sources)
https://blogs.pravda.com.ua/authors/leschenko/561ff0acc4633/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/12/the-money-machine-how-a-high-profile-corruption-investigation-fell-apart
https://antac.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/London-Criminal-Court-Judgment-in-the-Case-NoRSTO72014.pdf
https://www.transparency.org/files/content/pressrelease/Notes_for_editors.pdf
https://antac.org.ua/en/publications/how-gpo-headed-by-yarema-shokin-and-lutsenko-together-dumped-criminal-investigations-of-zlochevskyi/
THE TAX EVASION CASES
Tax evasion was one allegation the PGU did explore; it allowed them to commingle the cases and transform criminal allegations that could get Zlochevsky jailed into one that would allow him to avoid prison time. Per the criminal code of the Ukraine, people guilty of tax evasion are able to avoid prison if the amount is paid in full before any formal charges are filed.
AUGUST 2015 - OCTOBER 2016
Instead of exploring where the funds in Zlochevksy's London bank account came from, or addressing the issue that about 20 Million came from Sergiy Kurchenko who was already wanted for financial crimes, the PGU started looking into Zlochevsky's personal tax payments as the "crime." In October, the Office of Large Tax Payers of the State Fiscal Service of Ukraine audited one of Burisma Holding's subsidiaries, Esko-Pivnich. The audit went back 8 months to Ferbruary, coinciding with the time Poroshenko filed his dismissal papers for Shokin.
The result of the audit was merged with the criminal proceedings where the investigators who were supposed to be studying a crime of illicit enrichment or money laundering decided to check into MZ's taxes instead. They found not personal tax crime per Zlochevsky and used that to close the case number "805", the illicit enrichment / money laundering case. However, when it came to the business taxes, the preliminary investigation discovered a crime of tax evasion.
The discovery of a tax crime did not involve Hunter Biden because he had no association with preparing the taxes for Esko-Pivnich or overseeing any of the finances of Burisma Holdings. The focus was on MZ and his chief accountant of Esko-Pivnich, Volodarska R.Z. The audit determined Volodarska underestimated the taxes by 33,099,840 UAH (5,409,149 USD). A tax penalty was levied in an amount equivalent to 5,409,149 USD. MZ was given the opportunity to pay the full amount before any formal criminal charges were filed and he did. Investigators looking into the combined personal tax and company tax cases were made aware during an interrogation of Volodarska of the large payment on the same day day they closed case "805." No criminal charges were levied against either MZ or Volodarska on either the illicit enrichment/ money laundering case or the tax evasion case after a payment of 10.8 Million dollars in taxes and "penalties" was made.
Another tax invasion investigation, case No42014000000000375, had been opened in May 2014. It was alleged that subsidiaries of Burisma had extracted gas and then sold at a very low price to other companies under Burisma Holdings which reduced official profits for the subsidiary without loosing money for the main company. Any inter-organization sales had to be shared with the state-owned companies and Burisma failed to share such information.
Despite having been opened in 2014, the case was not pursued by either Yarema or Shokin. It was Lutsenko who, in July 2016, announced that he was investigating. At the time of his announcement, only preliminary estimates of what the unpaid taxes were could be made. In fact, the entire investigation was still in early phases, thus indicating Shokin did not pursue it during his tenure. The investigation was still trying to establish who was involved: " a circle of persons involved in the management of M. Zlochevsky's management structures and officials of state authorities who assisted him is being established." Source: Official webpage of the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine.
The result of the audit was merged with the criminal proceedings where the investigators who were supposed to be studying a crime of illicit enrichment or money laundering decided to check into MZ's taxes instead. They found not personal tax crime per Zlochevsky and used that to close the case number "805", the illicit enrichment / money laundering case. However, when it came to the business taxes, the preliminary investigation discovered a crime of tax evasion.
The discovery of a tax crime did not involve Hunter Biden because he had no association with preparing the taxes for Esko-Pivnich or overseeing any of the finances of Burisma Holdings. The focus was on MZ and his chief accountant of Esko-Pivnich, Volodarska R.Z. The audit determined Volodarska underestimated the taxes by 33,099,840 UAH (5,409,149 USD). A tax penalty was levied in an amount equivalent to 5,409,149 USD. MZ was given the opportunity to pay the full amount before any formal criminal charges were filed and he did. Investigators looking into the combined personal tax and company tax cases were made aware during an interrogation of Volodarska of the large payment on the same day day they closed case "805." No criminal charges were levied against either MZ or Volodarska on either the illicit enrichment/ money laundering case or the tax evasion case after a payment of 10.8 Million dollars in taxes and "penalties" was made.
Another tax invasion investigation, case No42014000000000375, had been opened in May 2014. It was alleged that subsidiaries of Burisma had extracted gas and then sold at a very low price to other companies under Burisma Holdings which reduced official profits for the subsidiary without loosing money for the main company. Any inter-organization sales had to be shared with the state-owned companies and Burisma failed to share such information.
Despite having been opened in 2014, the case was not pursued by either Yarema or Shokin. It was Lutsenko who, in July 2016, announced that he was investigating. At the time of his announcement, only preliminary estimates of what the unpaid taxes were could be made. In fact, the entire investigation was still in early phases, thus indicating Shokin did not pursue it during his tenure. The investigation was still trying to establish who was involved: " a circle of persons involved in the management of M. Zlochevsky's management structures and officials of state authorities who assisted him is being established." Source: Official webpage of the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine.
ILLEGALLY ISSUED GAS LICENSES
Case number No42015000000001142 (142) that levied allegations against multiple members of the ministry, including MZ, was opened in 2015. It alleged that MZ illegally issued gas extraction and exploration licenses to subsidiaries of his company, Burisma Holdings, during his time in office between 2010-2012. The time of the alleged criminal activity is very specific and did not involve Hunter Biden's time on the board and thus, there would be no investigation of Burisma documents or interrogations of personnel who were not present prior to 2012.
The criminal investigation was a investigation into multiple officials who the PGU claimed illegally issued licenses to companies they owned. (MZ companies are highlighted)
"Pari LLC, Esko Pivnich LLC, First Ukrainian Oil Gas Company LLC, Aldea Ukraine LLC, Ukrnaftoburinnya CJSC, Krymtopenergoservice LLC, Gasoilinvest LLC, Company Azov-oil LLC, Nadragas LLC, Tekhnoresource PJSC by officials of the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources of Ukraine during the period of 2010-2015 years aimed for self-enrichment."
Despite the investigation being opened in 2015 under Shokin's PGU, little was completed and it was why at the end of 2015, NABU took over.
2003-2005
MZ was Chairman of the State Committee for Natural Resources. He awarded gas licenses to Esko-Pivnich and Pari.
2/2006
After a change in government, an executive decree canceled the previously awarded licenses. An investigation was announced by the MIA into the State Committee for Natural Resources but never pursued.
2007
The executive decree was overturned in the supreme court and the gas licenses reinstated. At the time, corruption was prevalent in the government, PGU, and judiciary which made it difficult to determine which actions were based on law and which were based on influence. The legal system was a mockery in that it was able to be bought with pretty objects, favors, and money. The institution of government used law enforcement, PGU, and judiciary as a weapon, often lining it with officials who would be "loyal" to those in power over the needs of the country and the people. This corruption grew like a cancer until it hid a head during Yanukovych's regime and resulted in revolt by the people.
2010-2012
MZ held three separate offices that allowed him the power to issue licenses to his companies.
"These licenses were issued with numerous legal violations, including the lack of auction or competition" - "There is very clear evidence that companies associated with Zlochevskyi did not file one important document – that stating the approval of local community. Is this a violation? Yes, this is total violation.” states Yaroslav Yurchyshyn, the Head of Transparency International Ukraine. Yurchyshyn believes that a court appeal, to cease the activities of such companies, based on the lack of this document would be possible."source: Flourishing businesses of Mykola Zlochevskyi – Investigation 3/1/17
January 16 2015
, MZ is placed on the wanted list for financial corruption. The information used to place him on the list came from the UK SFO's investigation.
An official case regarding illegal gas licenses had yet to be open
JUNE 2015
Case 142 is opened against multiple members of the ministry, including MZ, for illegally issuing gas licenses to their companies and others during their time in office. MZ's time in office that gave him the power to issue gas licenses was between 2010 and 2012; No activities involving Hunter Biden would had been looked at as Hunter did not join Burisma until 2014.
"The criminal proceeding opened in June 2015 against the employees of the Ministry of Ecology of Ukraine, and Zlochevsky in particular, as they allegedly illegally issued oil and gas licenses to the companies that belonged to Zlochevsky in 2010-2012" - source: Kyiv Post
June 2015 - November 2015
Little was uncovered regarding the alleged illegal issuance of gas licenses to MZ's company. According to a later statement by the head of the S.A.P, the PGU's under Shokin and Lutsenko did not even provide enough information to be able to name MZ as a suspect of the crime of illegally issuing gas licenses.
"After a year and a half, SAP decided to close the case against Zlochevsky about the allegedly illegal issuing of licenses: according to Nazar Kholodnitsky , the investigation "did not receive sufficient data - both to declare suspicion and to complete the proceedings." Source: The court canceled the closure of the case against ZlochevskyHad Shokin investigated as he claimed, and there was something to find, then during the 6 months he had the case in his possession he should had to been in the least able to "declare suspicion" and name MZ as a suspect in a criminal proceeding. There was not even an attempt on Shokin's part to try to revoke the gas licenses he claimed were illegally obtained.
November 30, 2015
Shokin appoints Nazar Kholodnitsky, head of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office. . source: Nazar Kholodnitsky was the anti-corruption prosecutor
The head of the SACP reported directly to the Prosecutor General, Shokin, thus still giving Shokin control over various investigations.
DECEMBER 7-8th, 2015
Joe Biden issues notice to Poroshenko of the withholding of a 1Billion dollar loan that was contingent upon the Ukraine meeting requirements set by the IMF, including tackling corruption. According to Biden, the current head of the country's prosecutorial system was impeding the necessary corruption reform and needed to be replaced.
DECEMBER 23 2015
NABU took over case 142 from the PGU and under NABU, the investigation finally began.January 2016
It took NABU only one month to receive a key piece of investigative material that was needed to show a crime had been committed: information from the region council to show that obligatory approval of the municipal authorities was not obtained when issuing the permits. There was no opportunity given to other companies to present offers that would had been less costly to the state.
" During the investigation, detectives found violations in the issuance of special permits for the extraction of natural gas at 5 fields: Gutsulovsky, Volodimirovsky, Filippovsky and Niklovitsky. This gave grounds in criminal proceedings through the court to achieve the cancellation of issued permits, which later the state could through an open tender procedure offer investors on more favorable conditions for the state. And to do this, without waiting for the completion of the investigation in criminal proceedings." source: NABU reports on the investigation in the case of Zlochevsky.....
January - May 2016
NABU investigated. It later explained why it took time to find violations despite the case having been open and under the PGU since May 2015. NABU's statement matches that of Vitaly Kasko who described the investigation into Mykola Zlochevsky as "shelved" by prosecutors for all of 2014 and into 2015.
Analysis of the materials transferred from the GPU to NABU showed their low quality, lost time and capabilities. In fact, NABU detectives were forced to start collecting key evidence from scratch. NABU detectives found out that many of the original procurement documents in the Ministry of Ecology, which theoretically could significantly help establish the involvement of officials in abuses, were practically destroyed. And requests to foreign competent authorities, without which it is impossible to make up the whole picture, were not even transferred until the case was transferred to NABU [on 12/23/2015]." Source: NABU reports on....NABU had to start the investigation from "scratch" because Shokin had not pursued an appropriate investigation into the matter.
MAY 2016
Once the January documents were thoroughly reviewed, NABU sent a fell report to Nazar Kholodnitsky's office to present in court so the licenses could be revoked. However, Shokin's appointee failed to present the petition to the court in a timely matter.
August 2016
The SAP waited for three months to file the lawsuits to revoke MZ's licenses. The courts denied the application because too much time had passed between the information being received and the SAP taking it to court.
"However, the court refused to cancel the issued permits, allegedly because the SAP violated the terms of the petition (in January 2016, information was received from the regional council, in May 2016 the detectives sent information on the violations to the SAP, and in August 2016 the SAP filed lawsuits)." Source: NABU reports
Case number 142 was closed by Shokin's man, Nazar Kholodnitsky, who failed to enter the request for the licenses on time. According to a later statement by Lutsenko, Nazar Kholodnitsky claimed that the case had to be closed because NABU did not investigate. The evidence showed otherwise in that it was not until NABU started to investigate that there was an attempt to revoke the licenses, a key step in undoing the alleged wrongdoing. It was Nazar Kholodnitsky's failure to present the petition to the courts in a timely manner which resulted in the loss of the ability to right the wrongful acts of the illegally obtained licenses.
3/17/17
Questions arose as to why the Shokin appointee delayed the filing of the petition. According to Kholodnitsky, it was due to not receiving information from all sources on time.
“You know, it’s very good to comment, not seeing all the materials on the case. We use the law that is in force now. In order to justify when the prosecutor has the right to representation, we need to provide documents. We became aware and we started correspondence with The State Geological Survey, from the Ministry of Ecology. Until we had information that a particular body refuses to exercise its powers, we could not file a lawsuit. And from the State Geological Survey we received these confirmations only in August, that they did not want to (file lawsuits. - Ed.). Kone but we’ll fight to the end. Yes, we lost 3 out of 5. Two more are under consideration. But we’re at least doing something. And blaming that we missed something somewhere is an absolute lie. Is it better to we didn’t do anything at all ?! It’s easy to criticize. In early April there will be a competition. Let those who criticize and show the master class be served" - Source: ....trial of canceling 5 special permits....Kholodnitsky excuse supports that Shokin had not investigated otherwise the SGS could had been contacted earlier and there would had been no "waiting for a reply."
9/9/2017
The Qualification and Disciplinary Commission of Prosecutors opened a disciplinary case against Nazar Kholodnitsky for delaying the filing of the petition to revoke MZ's gas licenses. The request for the review was on the behest of the Anti-corruption Action Center of Ukraine who wanted to see the unfair practice in which Mykola Zlochevsky benefited from reversed as well as the man's crimes brought to justice. Kholodnitsky made the former impossible and AntAc believed he should have had to face the consequences for that.
The fact is that the head of the SAP has delayed the filing of an administrative lawsuit to the Ministry of Ecology and the State Geogadr, which helped the beneficial owner of the private gas company Burisma Group - Mykola Zlochevsky to retain control of the Ukrainian fields - AntAC
"According to the law, the SAP had 6 months to prepare a lawsuit against the Ministry of Ecology and get the mineral resources back into state ownership. However, its head Nazar Kholodnitsky did not do this on time, and appealed to the court only through 8 months. From now on, the chances of returning these deposits to the state in the near future are virtually nil, instead, they will continue to be successfully used to enrich the former Minister of Ecology." Source: disciplinary proceedings have been opened for inaction in the case of ex-minister Zlochevsky
9/20/17
Nazar Kholodnitsky defended his inaction in filing the petition to revoke MZ's license by claiming it was of no consequence. According to NK, the deadline for filing a violation was 6 months from the date of the violation and not from the time the crime was discovered.
"SAP did not delay filing the claim. In the decision, the Higher Administrative Court indicated that the appeal had expired in 2011......"the fact of a violation committed at a specific time, and not the fact that the prosecutor became aware of this."The Anti-corruption Center & Transparency International disagreed. They also challenged his excuse placing blame of the SGS
"The law gives six months to file a claim from the moment a state authority finds out about a violation. The SAP found out about the illegal issue of licences in January 2016 during investigation of criminal proceeding No. 42015000000001142 conducted by NABU. However, the claim was filed only in August 2016 and thus missed statute of limitations."
" Nazar Kholodnytskyi blamed the legal obligation to wait until the competent state authority files its own claim or refuses to do so. However, there was no way that the prosecutors of the SAP did not know about their limited legal capacity and the pending statute of the limitations for an administrative claim. It was their responsibility to push the other state authorities to timely provide the information and evidence necessary for the case" Source: Yarema, Shokin, Lutsenko dumped investigations into Zlochevsky
6/2018
Case number 142 was ordered to be re-opened by the courts. Thereafter claims as to why it was initially closed differ between Lutsenko in defense of Viktor Shokin and Shokin's pick for SAP Kholodnitsky verse both the NABU who investigated it and the Anti-Corruption Action center who were pushing for prosecution of MZ.
Case 142 demonstrates that very little was done during Shokin's tenure to investigate it. Despite the availability of documents supporting such a measure, Shokin never moved to file a petition to revoke MZ's gas licenses. He never corresponded with the GCS to see if they were going to take action against MZ. Additionally, the case did not involve any of Hunter Biden's activities on the board of Busima Holdings as case 142 involved MZ'c time in office between 2010-2012
EMBEZZLEMENT
Case No. 42014000000000181 (181) was opened in March 2014 under Yarema and
involved allegations that during his time as Minister of Environmental Protection, MZ embezzled 49,380 Million UAH. The case involved 7 total charges, two of which were added in June of 2014. Like the other investigation, case 181 was transferred out of Shokin's hands for inaction and sent to NABU. And, like the other cases, case 181 involved a time prior to Hunter joining the Burisma board. Investigators were looking at alleged illegal activities committed by MZ over just a period of 4 months. Yet, no charges were filed or progress reported under either Shokin or Yarema.
March 2010 - December 2012
MZ held government offices that allowed him to assign gas licenses and services to his companies.
MARCH 2014
Case 181 was opened and 5 charges of possible criminal conduct alleged. The allegations were MZ committed "embezzlement of state funds totaling to 49,380 mln UAH at public procurement of consulting services for implementing technologies of remote land exploration." Source: Yarema, Shokin, Lutsenko dumped investigations....
JUNE 2014
Had Shokin investigated during the 10 months the case was under his jurisdiction, more information could had been presented to the SAP he appointed, the case would not had been considered "futile", and hearings could have continued.
MARCH 2019, end portion
The SAP responded to NABU's draft report and indicated a "need for additional procedural actions." The investigation is ongoing.
Members within Shokin's own PGU as well as the government wanted him gone as they saw him as an obstacle to implementing much needed reform. Among them were reformist prosecutors Vitaly Kasko & Davit Sakvarlidze, Reformist Economic Minister Aivaras Abromavičius, and RADA member Yehor Soboliev who stated that in 2015 he "Personally initiated the resignation of general prosecutor Shokin." According to Soboliev, members of RADA had been campaigning for Shokin's firing for "more than half-a-year" prior to the March 29th, 2016 RADA vote. It was long before Joe Biden gave the December 2015 ultimatum to Viktor Shokin. Source: PBS, Why talking to Ukrainian officials disproves the Trump narrative on Biden
Facts show that Shokin was not only failing to pursue criminal investigation into either MZ or the Bidens, they show that Shokin was widely perceived as corrupt and or impeding corrupting reform. In fact, that perception resulted in members of RADA campaigning for his removal long before Joe Biden urged Poroshenko to do it. It was Shokin's failure to investigate cases such as Burisma, prosecute current and past corrupt officials, and promote reform within then PGU that was the cause for Joe Biden's demand Shokin be removed. Joe Biden's voice was just one in a sea of many.
Two additional charges were levied regarding the legitimacy of the "provision by the ex-Minister of Ecology of permits for the use of the subsoil of Esko-Sever LLC and Pari LLC, and the receipt of income from their mining activities hydrocarbons in Ukraine." -- Source: NABU reports.....
JUNE 9th, 2014
Vitaly Yarema was appointed head of the PGU. Shokin is one of his first deputies.
Vitaly Yarema was appointed head of the PGU. Shokin is one of his first deputies.
07/30/2014
Yarema's PGU dismissed the two additional charges.
8/2014 - February 2015
8/2014 - February 2015
Little to no progress occurred in case 181.
February 2015
February 2015
Yarema was dismissed as prosecutor general. Shokin, a close Poroshenko ally, was appointed as prosecutor general.
February 2015 - December 2015
February 2015 - December 2015
Little to no progress occurred in case 181.
JANUARY 2016
JANUARY 2016
The case was transferred to NABU. They quickly ran into some roadblocks such as missing documents for the procurement of land sensing services. The required storage period for the documents had expired as the purchases were made in 2011. Later in 2016, the SAP decided that the investigation was futile and stopped all hearings on the matter.
While the PGU dropped the investigation, the detectives of NABU continued to investigate.
While the PGU dropped the investigation, the detectives of NABU continued to investigate.
In 2016, they sent more than 20 requests for international legal assistance, since the company from whom they allegedly purchased remote sensing services has an Austrian registration. In addition, NABU initiated an examination of the intellectual property. Based on the evidence gathered, in October 2018, detectives sent a draft report to the UAS about the suspicion of a former senior official of the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources along with materials from the pre-trial investigation. Source: NABU reports....
Had Shokin investigated during the 10 months the case was under his jurisdiction, more information could had been presented to the SAP he appointed, the case would not had been considered "futile", and hearings could have continued.
MARCH 2019, end portion
The SAP responded to NABU's draft report and indicated a "need for additional procedural actions." The investigation is ongoing.
SHOKIN DID NOT PURSUE
According to a statement by Vitaly Kasko, the criminal cases against Burisma Holdings were shelved by prosecutors in 2014 through 2015.
"There was no pressure from anyone from the U.S. to close cases against Zlochevsky. It was shelved by Ukrainian prosecutors in 2014 and through 2015." Kasko. Source: BloombergDetails corroborate Kasko's claim that Shokin and the Prosecutor General before him failed to appropriately pursue criminal cases against Mykola Zlochevsky during their tenure.
- Illicit enrichment/ money laundering
- the case was transformed into a personal tax evasion and the source of the money in MZ's London bank account was never investigated.
- Tax Evasion
- MZ was allowed to pay back taxes and penalties which allowed him to avoid any criminal charges.
- Illegal issuance of Gas licenses.
- Little to no investigation occurred during Yarema's and Shokin's tenure and the case was transferred to NABU on December 23rd, 2015.
- NABU had to "start from scratch" due to the quality of the investigation prior to them.
- In one month, NABU was able to obtain documents that showed the permits were improperly issued, a step required to revoke MZ's licenses.
- Shokin's appointee delayed taking the request to revoke the licenses until it was too late.
- Embezzlement
- Little to no progress occurred on the case under Shokin and in January 2016 the case was transferred to NABU.
- Despite the Shokin-appointed SAP giving up on the case, NABU continued to investigate.
Shokin claimed he was leading a "wide-ranging case against Burisma" and that he was set to question Hunter Biden. However, facts show that the cases were transferred to NABU due to his inaction and that transfer was made after both Ambassador Pyatt and Joe Biden scolded the Ukraine for allowing the "corrupt actors within the prosecutor general’s office" to make "things worse by openly and aggressively undermining reform."
Additionally, facts show that none of the criminal cases involved either Biden. Hunter Biden was not responsible for calculating the company's tax liabilities and the cases of criminal conduct involved MZ's activities as Economic Minister between 2010 and 2012. Hunter Biden was not involved with the company at that time and there is no evidence to show that he took steps to help MZ cover up any crimes committed during that time.
Some Trump defenders argue that Hunter Biden "must have" been helping Zlochevsky cover up his crimes, getting paid high amounts to do it, Joe Biden knew it, and it was why he pushed for Shokin to be removed from office. However, the idea is based upon unsubstantiated speculation as to what Hunter Biden was getting paid to do. Actual facts support that there was a wide perception Shokin was either corrupt, impeding reform, or both. The IMF, EU and US including Ambassador Pyatt, Victoria Nuland, Bush-era John Herbst, & multiple Republicans all desired to see a complete reform of the Prosecutor General's office. It was something that Biden indicated in his December 8th speech to RADA. Additionally, multiple non-governmental organizational watchdogs including the Anti-corruption Action Center, Kharkiv Human Rights Group, Transparency International, and Automaiden all called for his replacement with someone who would tackle corruption within the government, law enforcement, prosecutors office, and judiciary and prosecute. There were multiple protests by the Ukrainian people demanding that Shokin be replaced.
Additionally, facts show that none of the criminal cases involved either Biden. Hunter Biden was not responsible for calculating the company's tax liabilities and the cases of criminal conduct involved MZ's activities as Economic Minister between 2010 and 2012. Hunter Biden was not involved with the company at that time and there is no evidence to show that he took steps to help MZ cover up any crimes committed during that time.
Some Trump defenders argue that Hunter Biden "must have" been helping Zlochevsky cover up his crimes, getting paid high amounts to do it, Joe Biden knew it, and it was why he pushed for Shokin to be removed from office. However, the idea is based upon unsubstantiated speculation as to what Hunter Biden was getting paid to do. Actual facts support that there was a wide perception Shokin was either corrupt, impeding reform, or both. The IMF, EU and US including Ambassador Pyatt, Victoria Nuland, Bush-era John Herbst, & multiple Republicans all desired to see a complete reform of the Prosecutor General's office. It was something that Biden indicated in his December 8th speech to RADA. Additionally, multiple non-governmental organizational watchdogs including the Anti-corruption Action Center, Kharkiv Human Rights Group, Transparency International, and Automaiden all called for his replacement with someone who would tackle corruption within the government, law enforcement, prosecutors office, and judiciary and prosecute. There were multiple protests by the Ukrainian people demanding that Shokin be replaced.
Members within Shokin's own PGU as well as the government wanted him gone as they saw him as an obstacle to implementing much needed reform. Among them were reformist prosecutors Vitaly Kasko & Davit Sakvarlidze, Reformist Economic Minister Aivaras Abromavičius, and RADA member Yehor Soboliev who stated that in 2015 he "Personally initiated the resignation of general prosecutor Shokin." According to Soboliev, members of RADA had been campaigning for Shokin's firing for "more than half-a-year" prior to the March 29th, 2016 RADA vote. It was long before Joe Biden gave the December 2015 ultimatum to Viktor Shokin. Source: PBS, Why talking to Ukrainian officials disproves the Trump narrative on Biden
Facts show that Shokin was not only failing to pursue criminal investigation into either MZ or the Bidens, they show that Shokin was widely perceived as corrupt and or impeding corrupting reform. In fact, that perception resulted in members of RADA campaigning for his removal long before Joe Biden urged Poroshenko to do it. It was Shokin's failure to investigate cases such as Burisma, prosecute current and past corrupt officials, and promote reform within then PGU that was the cause for Joe Biden's demand Shokin be removed. Joe Biden's voice was just one in a sea of many.
