The head of the CH stated that the ruling party is not funded by Andriy Verevsky or any other oligarch.
Information that deputies “Servants of the people “Receive” rewards in envelopes “for voting – this is a deliberately defamatory story,” said in an interview with ZN.UA the head of the political force Elena Shulyak , with whom she spoke Inna Vedernikova . At the same time, Shulyak claims that neither Andriy Verevsky nor any other oligarch is financing the ruling party.
“As the chairman of the party, I can clearly say that we do not receive anything from anyone except state funding. Which, by the way, was suspended during the war. This is my area of personal criminal responsibility, by the way. I can report for every penny. We have 26 regional organizations with completely transparent funding, about which I know everything. If you personally have information on who and how Verevsky finances our party, you should apply to the competent authorities, ”Shulyak said. until his death appealed to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau with the issue of payments in envelopes.
“If we already have such an open conversation, all these stories about envelopes, about curators in the faction, about how NABU is doing this, I am very indignant,” Shulyak continued. – I am the deputy chairman of the faction, the chairman of one of the groups. In my group were Anya Skorokhod, Yurchenko, Dubinsky. Deputies who have been talked about all the time, including in the media… Now the direct question is: if the faction had such unstated relations with deputies, wouldn't any of them (and law enforcement officers work closely with Yurchenko today) testify about this? It seems to me that all this is a story that is deliberately denigrating, in which I personally am extremely uncomfortable. Even talk to you about it now. But I have to do it. ”
According to Shulyak, this information is against the background of the dislike of the Ukrainian people for any government. “The authorities are a priori for Ukrainians – thieves and corrupt people who receive some extraordinary sums in envelopes in the Rada. All this is heated up in the media and on TV channels. And then suddenly it turns out that in recent years Russia has poured five billion into our information space to discredit the same government. For Putin to arrange a meeting with flowers here. It's all interdependent. And if NABU has any specifics, let's leave this SAP in parentheses and start to understand specifically who, what and for how much, “said the head of the ruling party.
According to her, at this stage, the anti-corruption bloc and NABU need maximum specificity and publicity. After all, according to Shulyak, “it is impossible to say that 240” servants of the people “in envelopes receive 50 thousand dollars for a program, and have no confirmation.”
At the same time, it is well known that NABU can work effectively only under the independent Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office, which has been without a head for a long time. Remarking that NABU should be included, Shulyak explained that competitions in SAP, NABU and others will not be included in the TOP-5 state priorities for some time.
“But I think that after the war our tolerance for corruption will not be zero, but negative. And it doesn't matter what design it will provide – NABU, NAPC, SAP, WACS, a dozen more services can be created, the main thing is that it works and brings things to an end, “Shulyak summed up.
Read also: By the end of the war in Ukraine, oligarchs may disappear naturally – Shulyak
We will remind, on December 24 the commission on election of the head of SAP for the second time couldn't approve results of competition >. In fact, the commission refuses to confirm the candidates' own scores during the interviews.
The main reason for the blockade is the winner's candidacy – Detective Klymenko led the investigation into Tatarov's corruption, so his candidacy for SAP does not suit Bankova.
On the eve of the final stage of the competition, the OASK decided to cancel the procedure of the competition commission. Judge Oleksiy Ogurtsov referred to the non-existent norm of the law, and was guided by only one version of the 2015 law. , ignoring the changes.
The next day, some members of the commission suggested postponing the hearing to review the court's decision, and suggested “postponing the approval of the results so that the decision would not be appealed in court.”
