The law on special confiscation will not make up for the failed operations of the Prosecutor General’s Office and the Ministry of Internal Affairs, on the contrary, it could lead to even more abuse in law enforcement and more financial losses for the state.
This opinion was expressed by a deputy of the “Samopomich” faction, Olena Sotnyk, commenting on the possibility of adoption of the bill №3025 on special confiscation of property of the Yanukovych regime representatives and of others. The bill was introduced by MPs Tetiana Chornovil (People’s Front) and Oleh Barna (Petro Poroshenko Block).
“The bill does not provide clear procedures to be followed by authorities and courts in considering applications for arrest or confiscation of property. The bill contains a single criterion by which one can carry out a special confiscation – this is the occupation of a certain position (from President and Minister to Head of a regional and city administration),” says the MP.
She notes that according to the bill, a petition for a special confiscation is filed by the Prosecutor General, on the proposal of his Deputy, the Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine or the Head of the Security Service.
“Moreover, the bill states that the Prosecutor General within 10 days verifies the grounds for the application of the special confiscation of property of the persons referred to in Article 1. In Article 1 it is indicated that the only basis for the application of a “special confiscation of property” is a certain position occupied by a person at a certain period of time,” said Sotnyk.
She states that adoption of this law carries risks and may be dangerous.
“First of all, the law may be applied to anybody selected by the Prosecutor General, and secondly, it will legalize the assets of Yanukovych by a decision of the International Court making Ukraine pay a penalty. Since the mechanism proposed by the bill is not consistent with international practice of special confiscation. And the property confiscated on the basis of this law will be easy to obtain again, thereby legalizing it through the International Court of Justice levying a penalty against the state,” she said.