The State Financial Monitoring Service could not explain how sanctions against Petro Poroshenko were prepared

The head of the State Financial Monitoring Service of Ukraine, Philip Pronin, was unable to provide clear reasons on the basis of which sanctions were imposed against Petro Poroshenko.

This was reported by the press service of European Solidarity.

At a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada’s Special Committee on Investigation of Illegal Actions That Could Harm the Economic Security of Ukraine, MPs from the European Solidarity faction asked the Head of the State Financial Monitoring Service a number of questions about how the decision to impose sanctions against Petro Poroshenko was made.

People’s Deputy Viktoriya Siumar was outraged that the head of the State Financial Monitoring Service did not answer any of the questions posed in substance.

“This is a lack of answers to questions. Because the president said that people would be explained and shown these materials, he said it – people would be shown these materials. You are now hiding this not only from people, you are hiding them from the Supreme Court. We are simply asking you to ensure publicity and accountability,” the deputy said.

Siumar was outraged that there are precedents in Ukraine of imposing sanctions without public access to the case.

People’s Deputy Nina Yuzhanina reminded Pronin of the requirement of Article 16 of the Law on Prevention of Counteracting Money Laundering, which expressly prohibits the transfer of information that is a secret of financial monitoring to anyone except law enforcement agencies in accordance with the established procedure.

“Therefore, the question for you is, the letter that you sent to the Ministry of Economy about the possibility of grounds for applying sanctions against Poroshenko, although there is this article, and also according to the law on sanctions, the right to directly contact the National Security and Defense Council, is exclusively the SBU. The question is, why did you transfer it to the Ministry of Economy? Did you previously discuss whether the Ministry of Economy would accept this material directly from you? Did you discuss it with Svyrydenko, or maybe with Stefanishyna? Did you consult with the president that you would transfer it exclusively to the Ministry of Economy? Why did you violate Article 16 of your profile law?”, the deputy addressed the head of the State Financial Monitoring Service.

She also recalled that the day after the NSDC decision on sanctions against Poroshenko, President Zelensky said that the head of the State Financial Monitoring Service whispered in his ear that there was a violation, and even here the “withdrawal of billions through charitable foundations” was mentioned.

“He said he heard from you,” she added.

The deputy stated that the First Deputy Prime Minister – Minister of Economy of Ukraine Svyrydenko also answers that the sanctions were prepared based on materials submitted by the State Financial Monitoring Service.

“It has now become absolutely clear, already when Poroshenko’s lawsuit against Zelensky is being considered, that these materials are not being provided because they either did not exist at all. And now you are lying and saying that you had the materials in front of you, but they did not exist. You are, of course, a hero. Go to the NSDC on February 4, and vote on sanctions on February 12,” Yuzhanina said.

People’s Deputy Volodymyr Viatrovych asked whether the head of the State Financial Monitoring Service provided the information on the basis of which Zelensky made his statement.

He quoted the president’s words from February 13 of this year: “I’m simply surprised that financial monitoring didn’t show us anything before. I didn’t see it, it was difficult for me to say. Now the Security Service and financial monitoring show billions. And all these people – Medvedchuk, Poroshenko, they are partners in this case. But I don’t want to blame, let the courts do it. And it’s not that someone is behind bars because of sanctions. Sanctions are restrictions on today’s use of certain money that was earned in such an illegal way.”

Recall that during the Supreme Court hearing in the Petro Poroshenko case, the judge asked why representatives of the president and the government did not provide the documents on the basis of which sanctions were imposed against the fifth president. Representatives of the authorities were unable to provide an answer, shifting responsibility to other bodies, which caused the judge’s indignation.

Earlier, Petro Poroshenko, before the start of the Supreme Court session, stated that President Volodymyr Zelensky’s decree on the introduction of sanctions should be canceled , because the president’s representatives have not been able to provide any documents on the grounds for such sanctions for five months.

Later, during the meeting itself, Petro Poroshenko noted that closing the court hearing on the illegality of sanctions from the public would mean turning Ukraine into Russia.

By the way, the French publication 24matins stated that sanctions in Ukraine are turning into a universal method of redistributing property in the interests of groups close to power .