Save (not so) private Nasirov

Roman Nasirov, former head of the State Fiscal Service, can escape punishment because of an unknown public organization’s claim.
A few weeks ago, the trial of Roman Nasirov was the main topic of discussions in the country – all the media were writing about it.
Now public attention to this issue has dropped.
In Facebook, there are only a few posts of Nasirov, where he complains about the employees of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, which won’t summon him for questioning.
Meanwhile, Nasirov’s case might take another twist, which might significantly complicate the process of his being indicted
In the proceedings of the District Administrative Court of Kyiv, there is a case #826/2619/17 on the lawsuit filed by a public organization “Union of Entrepreneurs “Zhovtneva” (hereinafter referred to as NGO) against the Chairman of the State Fiscal Service, Roman Nasirov.
NGO tries to recognize illegal the actions of Nasirov on provision of installments to the companies of Oleksandr Onyshchenko – “Firma “Khas” LLC, “Nadra Heotsentr” LLC, “Karpatnadrainvest” LLC. These are the very same actions on the basis of which the National Anti-Corruption Bureau has served Nasirov with charges.
What does it mean?
In order to prosecute Nasirov, prosecutors have to prove two things. The first one is that the deferred payment actions are illegal. The second one – that the state incurred losses as a result of such illegal actions.
The District Administrative Court of Kyiv is going to consider the first aspect: whether Nasirov’s actions were illegal. If the court dismisses the claim, it will actually confirm that Nasirov did not violate the law, and the granting of installments to Onyshchenko’s companies was legal.
In the future, this court decision will be the decisive argument of Nasirov’s lawyers to confirm that there was no crime in the actions of their client, and therefore there is no reason to prosecute him.
Of course, if the case is won, this will be an additional argument for prosecutors and the National Anti-Corruption Bureau. However, we already have grounds to argue that the suit was filed in order to be lost.
Why is the loss in the case very likely?
The lawsuit is very weak. There are no arguments for the illegality of Nasirov’s actions.
Well, this is logical; after all, according to the official version, the NGO learned about the illegal actions of Nasirov from the little-known media and the Facebook of MP Tetiana Chornovol.
At the same time, these are the National Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office that possess all the evidence proving the fact of the crime; but for some reasons they don’t get involved into the case.
So, it is possible that the judge will look at the decision on installments, state that the head of the State Fiscal Service has the authority to provide such an installment, and therefore there is nothing illegal in his actions.
Moreover, there is a doubt whether NGO can appeal against the decision that does neither relates to the NGO itself nor its members, because such decisions do not violate their rights. This circumstance creates an additional basis for refusal to satisfy the claim.
Other concerns
Of course, another motive in this case might be the desire of the public organization to seek publicity. However, some facts indicate that this can be a planned protection tactic designed by Nasirov’s lawyers. This is evidenced by several circumstances.
First of all, NGO requests that the case be considered behind closed doors, so that no one, except the parties, is present at the hearing.
Secondly, NGO requests not to publish the final decision in the accessible register of court decisions. Then the lawyers will tell that the court has established there had been no violations in Nasirov’s actions, and the society will not even be able to see this decision.
Thirdly, the claim was filed in mid-February 2017. At the moment, Nasirov already knew about the case, and therefore could plan all this. In addition, the lawsuit notes details that were never mentioned by the media.
For example, it is noted that Onyshchenko’s companies had not filed the documents necessary for the receipt of installments. This became known only during the hearing of the case of Nasirov on March 3. This fact confirms that NGO learned about Nasirov’s case either from the National Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, or from Nasirov himself.
Fourthly, the case was assigned for consideration extremely quickly. That means that someone was very interested in its consideration. Just think of it – the claim was filed on February 17, and its consideration was scheduled for April 11, 2017.
And now compare: the claim to withdraw the paragraph on the tax militia from the Tax Code, filed on 17 January, a month earlier, will be considered only on May 15. It is interesting that both cases will be considered by a judge of the District Administrative Court of Kyiv, R. Arsiria.
Fifthly, the lawsuit was initially filed without payment of court fees. Usually, lawyers do this in order to be able to “pull back” in case they don’t like the judge. If they are satisfied with the judge, the court fee is paid and the case is considered. If not – the claim is filed again and gets another judge.
That is, it is quite possible that the unknown public organization “Union of Entrepreneurs “Zhovtneva” might disrupt the first real anti-corruption case in the country’s history in such a non-public way.
Thus, the second episode of the “Nasirov case” will begin soon, on April 11, 2017 at 09:00 in the District Administrative Court of Kyiv.

Andrij Zhurzhij
object(WP_Term)#7783 (16) { ["term_id"]=> int(1) ["name"]=> string(4) "News" ["slug"]=> string(4) "news" ["term_group"]=> int(0) ["term_taxonomy_id"]=> int(1) ["taxonomy"]=> string(8) "category" ["description"]=> string(0) "" ["parent"]=> int(0) ["count"]=> int(4083) ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" ["cat_ID"]=> int(1) ["category_count"]=> int(4083) ["category_description"]=> string(0) "" ["cat_name"]=> string(4) "News" ["category_nicename"]=> string(4) "news" ["category_parent"]=> int(0) } object(WP_Term)#7784 (16) { ["term_id"]=> int(133) ["name"]=> string(8) "Articles" ["slug"]=> string(9) "analytics" ["term_group"]=> int(0) ["term_taxonomy_id"]=> int(133) ["taxonomy"]=> string(8) "category" ["description"]=> string(0) "" ["parent"]=> int(1) ["count"]=> int(431) ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" ["cat_ID"]=> int(133) ["category_count"]=> int(431) ["category_description"]=> string(0) "" ["cat_name"]=> string(8) "Articles" ["category_nicename"]=> string(9) "analytics" ["category_parent"]=> int(1) }
Articles