Oleksandr SHYNALSKY: The West is indifferent to our corruption
On May 15 the fifth and final round of the international seminar, Anticorruption Studies and Preventive Strategy, began in Kyiv. Among its participants are distinguished law enforcement officials from the US, UK, Italy, Lithuania, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Ukraine. They came to share professional experience, theories, and legal practices in combating corruption, money laundering, drug trafficking, etc. Not surprisingly, the media people present were mostly interested in the practical aspect. Ukraine is still regarded as one of the world’s most corrupt countries. The Day interviewed Deputy Prosecutor General Oleksandr SHYNALSKY, who is also responsible for the oversight of lawful performance by special units and other authorities combating organized crime and corruption.
Why is there so much talk about top-level corruption in Ukraine, whereas corrupt officials are apprehended mainly abroad?
Shynalsky: I am not saying that our legislation is imperfect, for we have more than enough laws. First of all, this situation is explained by the fact that the authorities directly responsible for combating corruption (the Ministry of Internal Affairs, SBU, tax police, and so on) do not implement these laws as they should. That’s why we don’t have big names among those brought to justice.
Is the Prosecutor General’s Office prepared to provide evidence to Switzerland, attesting Pavlo Lazarenko’s dirty five million dollars? Bernard Bertossa, then general prosecutor of the canton of Geneva, told The Day not so long ago that the Swiss side was prepared to return this money after freezing the accounts.
Shynalsky: We have no problems cooperating with the Swiss law enforcement authorities in investigating that case. And there is no issue of any evidence being provided by the Ukrainian side. As a rule, our investigators experience more problems receiving information from Switzerland, the US, and other countries. In all honesty, there are no fewer financial extradition issues here.
Does this mean that Mr. Bertossa did not tell the whole truth?
Shynalsky: I wouldn’t want to put it that way... One thing is perfectly certain: there are no reasons to prevent the return of that money to Ukraine from our investigators.
If so, the logical question becomes whether the law enforcement authorities of other countries are more interested in fighting our corrupt officials or leaking information.
Shynalsky: I don’t know where you got that information about Lazarenko, but I could give you examples concerning some people’s deputies arriving from Switzerland and the US, having a variety of facts with regard to ranking Ukrainian officials, including this case. It is as though they were doing something over there, and we were doing nothing here. I spoke with an official of the US attorney’s office this September, so I had an opportunity to verify such information. I asked him whether they gave such information to our people’s deputies. He replied that they never disclosed such information even to their own people, because this is forbidden by law, so any references to it were totally unsubstantiated.
Let me stress again that there is only one problem concerning the case of the former premier and other cases traced overseas. This problem is getting the required information from abroad. If they want information from us, they get it quickly, and Prosecutor General Mykhailo Potebenko mentioned this on more than one occasion. They, in contrast, remain silent on a number of issues.
As for their being interested in combating our corrupt officials, I attended a conference of European and Asian general prosecutors last November. We listened to their problems and shared ours. Their emphasis is on money laundering. In Eastern Europe and Asia there are several emphases, including illegal migration, drug trafficking, and so on. I don’t think that they are overly interested in our corruption. They are mostly concerned with preventing the laundering of our money in their countries.
Is there any pressure from such countries on the prosecutor’s office when dealing with such high-profile cases as Lazarenko, Bank Ukrayina, and so on?
Shynalsky: I can say here and now that if there had been any such facts, I would be the first to tell you about as many criminal cases against such officials.
And obstacles?
Shynalsky: There are no obstacles. In all my years as deputy prosecutor general I have never felt any pressure, any attempts to interfere; there hasn’t been a single phone call. And that’s the truth. Otherwise criminal proceedings would be initiated forthwith.
Ukrainian experience shows that measures against shadow privatization and bankrupting banks start being taken only after such crimes become common knowledge. Why?
It would be more proper to address this question elsewhere. Our mission is not to uncover the facts. This is the responsibility of the law enforcement authorities, SBU, and so on. It is our task to handle such cases, relying on specific evidence. Besides, people who can steal big money are no fools. They’re quite smart. They know how to steal and get off. Thus, law enforcement must to be credited for what facts they can bring to light.
