The selection commission for the head of the Asset Recovery and Management Agency (ARMA) held a public interview with candidate Viktor Dubovyk. TI Ukraine monitored the interview and summarized it below.
Dubovyk scored 21 out of 50 points on the legal component and 9 out of 40 on the economics component of the practical assessment.
Career background
The commission flagged a discrepancy between the candidate’s official documents and media reports regarding his roles at law firms VivaLEX and Volkhv: his autobiography listed him as director and lawyer, while open sources described him as managing partner and partner. Dubovyk explained this as variation in internal job titles — his employment record shows “director,” while his actual role may have been described differently within the firms.
The commission also noted that his autobiography omitted parts of his political history: in 2012 he ran for the Verkhovna Rada on the Green Planet party ticket, in 2015 for the Mykolaiv Regional Council on the Batkivshchyna ticket, and in 2013–2014 he worked as an advisor in the office of First Deputy Prime Minister Arbuzov and as a parliamentary assistant. Dubovyk explained that he filled out the autobiography based solely on his employment record, which he said is standard practice for civil servants.
His candidacy for the Mykolaiv Regional Council drew additional scrutiny, as he is from Donetsk Region. He explained that his grandmother lived in a small town in Mykolaiv Region, giving him close familiarity with its issues.
Practical assignment: economics component
The commission asked follow-up questions on the economics portion. Asked to give a concrete example of state losses caused by ineffective asset management, the candidate gave a vague answer, describing the risk of incomplete transfer of property complexes to ARMA without naming specific assets. As a solution, he proposed involving ARMA at the pre-trial stage, during seizure proceedings, to assess whether an asset can be managed.
On legislative changes needed to prevent asset sales to persons connected to defendants or to residents of the aggressor state, the candidate proposed three approaches: establishing a mechanism to determine whether persons are related parties; enabling ARMA to suspend procurement procedures upon identifying such connections; and shielding ARMA decisions from judicial blocking, drawing on the model used to protect NBU decisions in bank market exit proceedings.
Property and integrity
This section took up a substantial part of the interview.
House in Donetsk. The candidate confirmed ownership of a house in the Khoroshov cottage development in Donetsk, built between 2009 and 2014 based on a standard developer project. No one had lived in it before construction was completed, and by the time it was finished, the full-scale invasion of Donetsk Region had begun.
Second house in Donetsk. Adjacent to his own house, the candidate and his wife purchased a smaller property with funds provided by her parents. After relocating to Kyiv, they sold it and used the proceeds for living expenses.
Property near Kyiv. A house in Vyshhorod District — which the candidate described as a “mansion” he liked for its setting, size, and neighbors — was purchased primarily with funds from his former wife’s parents, supplemented by his own savings and an inheritance from his mother. The property also includes an unfinished structure where construction has stalled due to a shortage of contractors. Unfinished structures are not subject to property tax; Dubovyk pays only land tax.
Apartment in Kyiv. The candidate purchased an apartment for $8,700 as a non-residential technical space with no separate entrance — access was through a boiler room and electrical panel. Over roughly three years, he carried out a technical conversion (adding a separate entrance, windows, and doors) and completed the legal reclassification needed to sell it. The apartment was sold in 2019 for $51,000. Dubovyk said he has not retained documentation of the conversion costs.
Total financial assistance. The commission chair calculated that the combined financial support received from his former wife’s parents for various property purchases exceeded $200,000. The candidate confirmed the figure, noting the actual amount was higher.
Division of property after divorce. Upon divorce, his ex-wife received a car, a plot of land, and an apartment. The candidate retained the house near Kyiv, where he lives with his son, and the unfinished structure. The committee noted an asymmetry: he kept assets on Ukrainian-controlled territory, while his former wife received property in occupied or frontline areas. Dubovyk considers the division proportionate, given that he is raising their child, and that she also received the car and the Kyiv apartment.
Powers of attorney from his father. The commission informed the candidate of two powers of attorney issued by his father — in March and August 2014 — of which Dubovyk said he was unaware until the interview. He explained that under Ukrainian law a power of attorney may be issued without the named person’s knowledge, and noted that he had discussed with the NACP head how this could be rectified. He also stated that he has had no contact with his father since 2012, following his mother’s death.
Valuation of his mother’s property. To document the origin of funds, the candidate submitted a 2023 appraisal of his mother’s real estate in Mariupol, which had been sold in 2005–2009. The commission chair questioned the methodology: physical access to the properties in 2023 was impossible. Dubovyk explained that the appraiser relied on State Property Rights Register data, records of a $50,000 mortgage agreement with Privatbank, and court decisions concerning the subsequent owner.
Leadership and vision for ARMA
As an example of strategic planning, Dubovyk cited his work developing the Justice System Development Strategy 2022–2030 in his current role at the Office of the President, which involved a broad range of stakeholders — the Supreme Court, the High Council of Justice, the High Qualification Commission of Judges, international partners, and civil society. The document is embedded in the Rule of Law Roadmap approved by the Cabinet of Ministers. He acknowledged that while leading the process he faced significant pressure from civil society organizations and media who alleged that certain decisions were unlawful.
On ensuring ARMA’s independence, he identified three priorities: developing a communications strategy with weekly public briefings, expanding the powers of the public council, including granting it the right to comment on ARMA’s draft regulations, and establishing a dedicated regulatory drafting unit within the agency.
Dubovyk also expressed interest in building a “direct communication mechanism” — in plain terms, using the ARMA head’s social media presence to publicly defend decisions and demonstrate the agency’s work. A similar approach was used by former ARMA head Olena Duma, though Dubovyk added that over the years the agency had been using this “powerful” tool in the wrong way.
As his key goal in the role, Dubovyk stated his aim to make ARMA “an institution where every decision can be explained, verified, and defended.”
The selection commission for the head of the Asset Recovery and Management Agency (ARMA) held a public interview with candidate Viktor Dubovyk. TI Ukraine monitored the interview and summarized it below.
