Kyiv, Ukraine — The investigation into alleged misconduct by Oleksandr Zima, head of the legal department of the National Bank of Ukraine, appears to have stalled significantly. Denys Neviadomskyi, President of the All-Ukrainian Association of Retired Judges, commented that the lack of formal charges allows investigators to indefinitely shelve the case.
Criminal proceedings were initiated in late 2023 under a provision of the Criminal Code that addresses abuse of power and resulting serious consequences. The case traces back to an official correspondence from Zima, who also chairs the Administrative Board of the Deposit Guarantee Fund for Individuals. In this letter, he urged the fund to withdraw court actions brought against the National Bank by Concord Bank before its liquidation proceedings began. The bank contested fines totaling nearly 63.5 million hryvnias imposed by the regulator.
Following Zima’s recommendation, concerns arose regarding the deprivation of shareholders’ rights to a fair trial, as noted by Olena Sosiedka, a co-owner of Concord Bank. The Pechersk Police Department in Kyiv has since taken over the case, acknowledging Sosiedka and her sister, Yulia, as victims, indicating the serious nature of Zima’s actions.
Responding to inquiries, law enforcement indicated plans to question Zima in connection with the investigation, with potential implications for his office depending on the findings. However, almost six months have passed without any substantial progress in the inquiry. Actions taken have been limited to obtaining documents, and there have been no witness interrogations or interactions with Zima.
Neviadomskyi criticized the situation, expressing concerns that the case is essentially immobilized. He emphasized the troubling implications of the absence of formal accusations, which permits inconclusive proceedings without any progress. The retired judge pointed out that during wartime, procedural timelines are effectively frozen for cases without formal suspicion, extending the potential delay indefinitely.
This stagnation could lead to significant repercussions, Neviadomskyi warned, as it opens avenues for abuse within the judicial system. He acknowledged that there are options for pushing back against investigative inaction, but these avenues vary depending on the stakeholders involved. Victims of the alleged misconduct can appeal to the prosecutor or an investigating judge to seek swifter action.
Moreover, such delays in high-profile cases involving prominent financial figures can severely undermine public trust in justice and governmental institutions. The inaction may allow individuals connected to investigations to manipulate circumstances to minimize repercussions for any potential wrongdoing.
The ongoing silence from law enforcement on such high-stakes matters risks damaging the reputation of state bodies and raises concern over systemic issues of accountability. Observers continue to watch as this case unfolds, with implications not only for the individuals involved but for broader institutional integrity.
This article was automatically generated by OpenAI. The people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate, and any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by reaching out via email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.