Andrii Borovyk: Why liquidating ARMA will not solve seized property issues
Editor's Note: The opinions expressed in the op-ed section are those of the authors and do not purport to reflect the views of the Kyiv Independent.
Almost every day for the past six months, we have seen headlines that the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU), the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), and other law enforcement agencies have exposed collaborators or corrupt officials.
The property of those caught is often seized and transferred to the state. The seized assets are sometimes striking – they have ranged from thousands of metric tonnes of iron ore that Russian oligarchs were unable to take out of Odesa ports, to land used to grow sunflowers and corn or shares of large companies.
Under current legislation, seized assets are transferred to and managed by Ukraine’s Asset Recovery and Management Agency (ARMA) until criminal proceedings are finalized and the fate of seized assets is determined.
But recent developments indicate some intention of changing the order of things.
The first sign was a statement by the Servant of the People faction leader Davyd Arakhamia on Feb. 22, in which he proposed to shut down ARMA and transfer its powers to the State Property Fund of Ukraine (SPFU).
At the time, the proposal took the public by surprise. But more reports appeared indicating that such a request stemmed from the Presidential Office due to ARMA’s apparent lack of efficiency.
But why liquidate ARMA?
It is obvious that such a simple solution will not lead to any positive results. Its destruction will not solve any issues, improvements or changes are unlikely to occur, and much bigger problems are looming on the horizon.
