[ad_1]
The acting head of the Specialized Prosecutor’s Office, Maxim Grischuk, said there was no resistance from the General Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine in the investigation of the PrivatBank case.
In the PrivatBank case, an examination was carried out, which ended in the second half of February, this allowed it to be activated. The acting head of the Special Prosecutor’s Office, Maxim Grischuk, recounted this in an interview with RBC-Ukraine, published on March 17.
“The escalation of the case was somewhere between November and December 2020, and the results of the examination arrived on February 20, only confirmed the losses that we incriminated the suspects,” he said.
Grishchuk emphasized that the information that the investigation encountered resistance from the leadership of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine does not correspond to reality.
“There are procedural peculiarities, but to say that this is only resistance … There are procedural moments: somewhere the prosecutor says something has to be done, somewhere the detective does it again. There was resistance. But there are many episodes in this” A broadly speaking, there is an episode about the theft of $ 5 billion from PrivatBank, and there the case is far from over, “he said.
On February 23, NABU detectives informed three former senior executives of PrivatBank about the suspected embezzlement of more than 136.9 million UAH. According to media reports, we are talking about the former first deputy director of the bank’s board of directors Vladimir Yatsenko, the former director of the board Alexander Dubilet and the former director of one of the departments of the financial institution Elena Bychikhina.
PrivatBank, Ukraine’s largest commercial bank, was nationalized on December 19, 2016. Ukraine increased it by 155 billion UAH. Previously, the bank belonged to businessmen Igor Kolomoisky and Gennady Bogolyubov.
In December 2017, PrivatBank filed a lawsuit against its former owners. The plaintiffs claim that the entrepreneurs withdrew about $ 2 billion from the bank through a series of illegal transactions. The former owners, in turn, dispute its nationalization. In 2019, the court ruled that it was illegal. The National Bank of Ukraine appealed against this decision. Legal proceedings are ongoing.
[ad_2]
