The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine opened criminal proceedings against Lviv Mayor Andriy Sadovyi pursuant to the HACC ruling. A few days later, another one was opened, and both cases were closed in two weeks, reports
On 9 July, the High Anti-Corruption Court ordered the NABU to open proceedings against allegedly illegal decisions by Lviv Mayor Andriy Sadovyi. The case concerned the sale of a land plot in the Ryasne-2 industrial zone near Lviv. This area was subsequently allocated for the construction of a 25-hectare industrial park.
“Pursuant to the decision of the HACC investigating judge on 11.07.2024, the information was registered in the URPTI on the grounds of a criminal offence under Part 2 of Article 366 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (committing forgery – ed.). At the same time, on 02.08.2024, within the framework of the pre-trial investigation, information was additionally entered into the URPTI on the grounds of a criminal offence under Part 2 of Article 364 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (abuse of power or position – ed.). on 5 August 2024, the materials of pre-trial investigations in the aforementioned criminal proceedings were merged into one proceeding, the criminal legal classification of which is determined under Part 2 of Article 366; Part 2 of Article 264 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. No one has been served a notice of suspicion in the said criminal proceedings,” the NABUsaid .
At the same time, the Bureau added, on 14 August 2024, a decision was made to close the criminal proceedings on the basis of clause 9-1, part 1, art. 284 of the CPC of Ukraine (there is an unrevoked decision of the investigator, coroner, prosecutor to close the criminal proceedings – ed.)
In essence, this means that similar circumstances have been previously investigated by someone (probably the police or another pre-trial investigation body), and there is a resolution of the investigator or prosecutor to close such a case. And it is on this basis that the NABU is now basing its decision to close the proceedings that investigated the same actions of Andriy Sadovyi.
As lawyers explain, the situation described above is a kind of “defence tool” that is often used by those involved in criminal proceedings: they initiate a similar investigation against themselves in another law enforcement agency – usually at the “controlled”, often district or city level of investigative bodies – in order to obtain a decision to close the case. This seems to imply that someone else has “already dealt with this situation” and effectively deprives the other pre-trial investigation body (in this case, the NABU – ed.) of the opportunity to conduct its own investigation.
As a reminder, as reported