Candidates are actively interviewed for the position of the Head of the ARMA. All of them want to present themselves in the best way possible, prepare presentations, and tell in detail about the future vision of the Agency’s development.

Who exactly did the selection commission already talk to and what did the commission members ask? Find out below!

Artem Brintsov — Head of the Legal Support Department of the High Anti-Corruption Court

The candidate began his introductory part with a special presentation, in which he described in detail the vision of the mission, values, and priorities of the ARMA. In particular, Brintsov noted that the transfer of the function of managing confiscated assets from the ARMA to the State Property Fund, spelled out in the newly adopted draft law No.8250, is an institutional loss for the Agency. He also noted that ARMA’s cooperation with anti-corruption bodies is insufficient and pointed to the lack of state policy in the work of the institution.

The commission was interested in how Brintsov planned to implement transparency in the work of the ARMA. To this, the candidate replied that the ARMA was guided by Art. 25 of the specialized law, but that was not always justified because only personal data and information relating to the pre-trial investigation should not be disclosed to the public. The rest of the information needs to be disclosed. For his part, Brintsov plans to disclose information about the assets and introduce a profile where each potential manager will be able to get the necessary information: “If we do it honestly, if we do it openly, we have nothing to hide. We protect sensitive information and nothing more.”

In general, the candidate plans to pay considerable attention to the digitalization of asset management processes. First of all, he wants to assess the available resources because the ARMA already has its own IT laboratory. According to Brintsov, there is too much subjectivism in the Agency’s approaches to choosing a manager, so this practice needs to be changed. Such an analysis requires a deep level of expertise.

Brintsov will start communicating with the ARMA team with an approach that all employees are professional and highly qualified. Over time, there may be moments that will require some reinforcement. “I will try to talk to almost everyone, and I will find time for it. It is critical for a manager to hear both positive and negative trends to navigate the realities.”

The commission also asked about the property of the candidate, in particular — an apartment in Kyiv, worth UAH 1 mln, which is lower than the market price, as well as sources of funds for it. Brintsov said that the apartment was purchased by his mother for a market price. The apartment was in the house built in the 80-90-s, it was not repaired, and, moreover, was also flooded before the sale. Therefore, the price is not lower than the market one. As for the funds for the purchase — it was the income from the sale of his parents’ apartment in the village of Kopylyn — it was sold for USD 20,000, as well as from the sale of his father’s cars. Brintsov himself plans to buy his apartment for his family.

The candidate believes that the fact that his work experience is not related to central executive authorities is not a problem. At the same time, when he worked as an assistant judge and submitted documents for the competition to the HACC, he was eager to join the fight against corruption. And today, understanding the institutional state of the ARMA, he sees the strength and opportunities to change this body for the better.

Brintsov also commented on the fact that his mother was among the founders of the Poltava Region credit union — together with the ex-mayor of Poltava Oleksandr Mamai. According to the candidate, his father worked for some time in institutions related to Mamai because he headed a serious agrarian business in Poltava Oblast. Lending and other financial issues were carried out through the specified credit union, which had more than a hundred founders. There is no other connection between his mother and Mamai.

Brintsov sees no reason for a potential conflict of interest with his relatives and entourage because they are not engaged in entrepreneurial activities with assets.

Viktor Dubovyk — director of the Department of the Anti-Raider Office of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine

At the very beginning of the presentation, the candidate mentioned that “public service is the pinnacle of a legal career.”

The commission was interested in the political impartiality of the candidate. In particular, Dubovyk was asked about the time when his father was First Deputy to Zakharchenko, Minister of Internal Affairs, and the candidate himself was an advisor to Yanukovych’s ex-deputy prime-minister and ally Serhii Arbuzov. After all, the ARMA was originally created to recover the assets of the fugitive president and his entourage.

Dubovyk replied that his father retired and had no influence on him. And he joined the Cabinet of Ministers for an internship after obtaining the bachelor’s degree in 2011, and passed it successfully given that the legal department suggested he leave a resume. Already in 2013, Dubovyk became the director of a law firm, and at the same time, he was offered to become an advisor to one of Arbuzov’s assistants, who reviewed regulatory acts on their compliance with the law.

The commission also asked why Dubovyk hid information about the work of Roman Romaniuk, deputy assistant from the Petro Poroshenko Bloc, to which the candidate replied that it was work on a voluntary basis, and there was no such entry in the employment book.

A separate discussion arose about Dubovyk’s membership in the Green Planet party, from which the candidate ran for the Verkhovna Rada. To this, Dubovyk replied that he was not a member of the party because the nomination did not imply membership in the party. However, according to member of the commission Ostapenko, the archival pages of the Central Election Commission website contain information that Dubovyk is still a member of the party, to which the latter replied that he had not submitted documents personally, had not written an application for membership, and did not have a membership card. And, as it turned out, he does not even remember whether he wrote his autobiography as a candidate for MP.

The commission asked about the large amount of property that Dubovyk owned jointly with his ex-wife — more than 10 objects — while the taxable income of the candidate for the last 24 years was about UAH 4 mln for 1998 – 2022. Dubovyk said that this amount did not include the income of his wife and her family (his wife’s father sold shares of the Avdiivka Coke Plant, which were then used to purchase property). Some documents were lost because they were stored in the Technical Inventory Bureau in Mariupol.

When asked whether Dubovyk used a car, he answered affirmatively, and explained that that was his current wife’s car, acquired even before the marriage. When asked if the car was expensive, Dubovyk said: “My wife should be asked of how valuable it is.” Interestingly, the brand of the car was not indicated during the interview.

Other questions related to a house in Donetsk, the ownership of which was registered in May 2014. Dubovyk explained that the construction began in 2009, ended in March 2014, but it took some time to obtain documents for registration, and then the territorial departments of justice remained in Donetsk — until November of that year.

Dubovyk’s position on working with the existing ARMA team is interesting. According to him, the State Anti-Corruption Program indicates that the entire leadership of the institution needs to be replaced, so, all management members, if they want to remain in office, must prove their ability to work honestly and effectively using the polygraph.

The same applies to those former officials of the ARMA, in whose respect court decisions on reinstatement were adopted. Dubovyk is convinced that the reorganization of the ARMA central office is crucial. The persons in whose regard court decisions were adopted can get positions that would correspond to their skills if they prove their compliance. And therefore, it is still necessary to establish whether these persons have the right to hold positions in such a state body.

Olena Duma — Deputy Head of the Chernihiv Regional State Administration (until September 30, 2021).

This is the first person who not only answered the questions, but also asked their own: what should the Head of the ARMA do so that each commission member believes that they were right in choosing the head? To which Dmytro Ostapenko answered something commonplace about the mission of the chosen one and fair choice.

Quotes from the interview:
“I’m not the kind of person you can pressure.”
“The main goal is to restore the transparency of the ARMA’s work and significantly increase budget revenues.”

Olena Duma came thoroughly prepared with a presentation containing 180+ slides. She said she wanted to ensure the commission that she deeply understood the Agency’s work and that she was well aware of all the processes, problems, and possible remedies. At the same time, Duma was very critical of the recent work of the ARMA (for example, she criticized the Agency’s statement that Medvedchuk’s yacht should be sold on international platforms because it did not comply with the legislation of Ukraine).

Olena Duma presented her vision of changes in the ARMA, among them:
– to improve the management of seized property so that it is more effective;
– to change the non-transparent selection of appraisers and the inconsistency in the purpose of asset valuation;
– to automate all processes of the Agency;
– to create a unit of digital detectives (“the modern world is changing, so is crime”);
– to improve cooperation with MPs to regulate the legislation on the activities of the ARMA;
– to strengthen work with international organizations to recover more foreign sanctioned property (now 1%);
– to fill the staff and regularly train employees, staff the territorial bodies (183 vacancies now).

In general, Duma has more than 22 years of experience in state bodies, she is a co-founder of LLC Avers, which provides consulting and legal services, she is very active in anti-corruption and trade union organizations, habing organized and participated in rallies.

Subsequently, the commission had a logical question — whether Olena Duma will be able to ensure political neutrality, which is necessary for the head of such a body as the ARMA, given her experience. Duma replied that the status she formed over many years of work in civil society organizations and in the civil service only strengthened her neutrality (because she has a view from both sides: the state and society). In this context, she provides a historical example of Golda Meir (a native of Kyiv, who became the Prime Minister of Israel).

Then Ms. Duma told the commission about her activities outside work, namely trade union and anti-corruption activities. She says that her goal is always the search for justice. According to her, it was after she became a whistleblower and reported corruption schemes in the Social Insurance Fund to law enforcement agencies that they wanted to dismiss her. However, she achieved justice — on April 11, the Kyiv Court of Appeal found this dismissal illegal.

When the members of the commission moved on to property and financial questions, they found several inconsistencies. For example, according to the estimates of the working group, the official income of Duma from 1998 to 2022 (when she worked) was a little more than UAH 2 mln, and she has property, according to estimates, for more than UAH 3 mln. The candidate denied the correctness of the calculation and explained in detail where she got the funds for each newly purchased property (for example, an electric car Mazda MX60 allegedly with a technical malfunction for UAH 235,000 and an apartment in Kyiv).

Dmytro Zhoravovych — Acting Head of the ARMA.

At the very beginning, the candidate mentioned that he had been heading the Agency for two years, and his entire presentation was more like a report on the work over the past two years. In general, during the interview, Zhoravovych presented himself not so much as a candidate for the post, but as the current head of the institution. But, unfortunately, in his speech, the candidate did not make a special emphasis on overcoming corruption risks.

First of all, the commission was interested in scandals related to the activities of the Agency and its current leadership, in particular, the absence of Zhoravovych at the last meeting of the Temporary Investigative Commission of the Verkhovna Rada. To this, the candidate replied that he did not attend the meeting because a government committee meeting was held on the same day, where the issue of the transfer of seized property to the ARMA was resolved. For his part, he offered to join the TIC online, but did not receive the corresponding link.

In addition, the commission asked about the features of the implementation of personnel policy in the ARMA, in particular regarding former employees of the institution.

Zhoravovych spoke about his position on three such cases. Thus, according to him, the statement of Volodymyr Pavlenko, ex-deputy head of the ARMA (he also participates in the competition), on the withdrawal of the document provided by him on dismissal from office contained mistakes. That is why the court dispute arose. In this case, the Supreme Court sided with the dismissed. Now, he needs to come to the ARMA and write a personal application on the reinstatement. As for another ex-employee, Andrii Potiomkin, the Supreme Court supported the position of the ARMA and refused to satisfy the claim.

Zhoravovych also mentioned the situation with the third employee, Stanislav Seriohin, head of the Central-Western Interregional Territorial Office of the ARMA, who also participated in the competition. An internal investigation was conducted against him, as reported by all relevant authorities, including the NACP. For his part, Zhoravovych does not consider the initiation of such an investigation to be a conflict of interest because he cannot influence the opinion of the selection commission in any way.

The candidate rejected all accusations of the super high bonuses of his employees and the inflation of the ARMA staff, including through granting Zhoravovych’s close relatives with positions. Allegedly, his relatives do not work in the ARMA, and all salaries and bonuses are paid in accordance with the requirements of the current legislation. And in general, if we compare the payments to ARMA employees with those in other law enforcement agencies, then the Agency’s salaries are 4–5 times lower.

At the same time, the current head of the ARMA is convinced of the absence of corruption risk in the approach to the competitive choice of managers of seized assets, which is currently operating in the Agency. According to him, the website of the ARMA contains all announcements about such competitions; for maximum openness in this matter, the ARMA began to cooperate with the Prozorro.Sale system and publish information through it. The communication is conducted by employees who do not make decisions on the results of competitions, and this communication is of an advisory legal nature.

Volodymyr Pavlenko — serviceman, used to be Deputy Head of the ARMA.

During his speech, the candidate called the Agency “the first dead state body in the war.” He considers the report of the current candidate and acting head of the ARMA Zhoravovych on the achievements of the Agency for 2022 to be manipulative. According to Pavlenko, most of the competitions held by the body were conducted according to the decisions of the previous ARMA team, and in 2022, the Agency brought significantly less income than before.

Mr. Pavlenko wants to see the ARMA as an “economic Mossad” that will strengthen Ukraine’s defense capability in the war. In his opinion, the following actions will help with this:
— Only employees with high KPI should be exempted from military service; officers of the Ministry of Defense/veterans of war with experience should be appointed to work in key units.
— Appointing the head of the ARMA by presidential decree because it will promote independence.
— Transferring Russian assets under the control of the defense complex
— Transferring assets blocked by the NSDC to the ARMA and allowing the NSDC to appoint asset managers from the public sector.
— Using technical capabilities (laboratories, access to registers) in the interests of the Armed Forces and intelligence.
— Selling assets on Prozorro.Sale, introducing an asset map and a profile of the manager to make the ARMA more transparent.
— Restoring the collegial selection of asset managers and publish protocols on the results of these selections.

Briefly about the candidate’s experience. Volodymyr Pavlenko holds a Master’s Degree in Law, he worked as a lawyer and arbitration manager for more than 10 years, and now he is obtaining a Ph.D. degree, while simultaneously performing combat missions. According to him, as Deputy Head of the ARMA, he tripled the proceeds of the Agency, launched transparent procedures for the selection of managers, and concluded contracts that now form 90% of the body’s budget.

The commission noted that a criminal proceeding was opened against Pavlenko — the leadership of the ARMA was charged with embezzlement of more than USD 400,000 in 2021. The media wrote that he and other persons transferred money to an unrelated person based on forged court decisions. In response, the candidate noted that the case got “frozen” and was not referred to court, and all interim measures regarding him were canceled. Pavlenko believes that in the course of those events he was deceived by scammers, and there are disagreements about who owned these funds. Therefore, this case does not damage his reputation.

Pavlenko does not consider his military service to be an obstacle because he signed a contract, and he can be withdrawn from the army and sent to the ARMA. Previously, he was suspended from the post of Deputy Head of the ARMA. However, even after the court decision in favor of the candidate, he could not return to work because, allegedly, “he is not really welcome there.”

Next, the candidate was asked property questions. In 2020-2021, he bought and sold a plot for UAH 44,000, on which a few months later a ready-made house appeared. Pavlenko assured that the house was an affordable townhouse in the Kyiv region, which was built according to a ready-made procedure, so the price was corresponding. At the same time, his father has acquired another 5 plots in recent years and managed to build a house. In response, the candidate noted that it was also an affordable model townhouse, but one of the plots was given to his father by the village, and he bought the rest for the money saved in the course of his life.

Finally, Pavlenko explained how he planned to recover and seize the assets of corrupt officials abroad. In his opinion, the ARMA should expand ties with similar foreign institutions. It is also necessary to cooperate with the Prosecutor General’s Office because it will help to effectively appeal to law enforcement agencies outside Ukraine.

Andrii Potiomkin — lawyer, ex-head of the legal department of the ARMA.

The candidate created his presentation on the comparison of achievements, mistakes, and potential of the ARMA.
— Potiomkin is sure that the potential for the institution is the opportunity to work with international funds, which will attract specialists to represent the ARMA in foreign jurisdictions.
— The mistakes included the absence of a joint order of the ARMA and the Prosecutor General’s Office on access to the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations, as well as the lack of automation of access to all registers.
— The candidate sees the potential in the ability of the ARMA to provide administrative services to arbitration managers and other persons to help in the search for assets.
— In general, according to Potiomkin, the ARMA performs only 3 of the 13 functions defined by the law, that is, the effectiveness of the institution today is only 23%.

First of all, the candidate was asked about the status of his legal dispute on reinstatement in the ARMA. In 2020, Potiomkin was dismissed from the Agency due to a negative assessment of his activities. The candidate said that he learned about the final negative outcome in this case while watching the interview with the acting head of the ARMA Dmytro Zhoravovych. Member of the commission Ostapenko simply confirmed the availability of the relevant court decision in the register during the conversation.

At the same time, the candidate could not clearly explain how he knew the text of the notice of suspicion to Oleksii Yanchuk, head of the ARMA, in the case of the sale of carbamide. According to Potiomkin, he is involved as an “expert witness” in this case, and thus he helped the investigation after he was excluded from the circle of suspects because his expert vision was useful for law enforcement agencies. To the clarifying question that the Criminal Procedural Code does not have a definition of “expert witness,” Potiomkin gave a strange answer: allegedly, this is done unofficially, hence his awareness.

Potiomkin talked a lot about not having connections with lawyer Andrii Dovbenko. The candidate told the whole history of his acquaintance with Dovbenko’s wife, but, according to him, he had no contacts with the defendant in the scandalous case against the ARMA.

Moreover, the commission asked why the candidate’s income was only UAH 951,000 from 1998 to 2016. Potiomkin replied that he began to work as a student, starting from his 5th year of studies. “I’m not certain that my income was somehow recorded, I just worked — this was my student income.” At the same time, he then had a high salary in all jobs, but he cannot always guarantee the integrity of the employer in submitting financial statements.

The commission also asked about the property of the candidate’s family, in particular, how his wife managed to buy a 2015 Toyota Camry car for only UAH 300,000 in 2016. According to Potiomkin, his wife had bought this car before their marriage. Allegedly, she had money for a more expensive car. “She went to the market, she saw the price, she saw the color. As she says, she cared more for the color, and not for the technical characteristics, she is a girl after all. And she bought it.”

And when asked about the 4 proceedings for violation of the traffic rules, Potiomkin replied that all fines in these cases were paid. In particular, one of them concerned speeding when the candidate took the eldest son to the hospital. “I cannot be a bad driver because I have children, and I care for them,” said Potiomkin.

The commission was interested in what the candidate was doing after his dismissal from the ARMA. Potiomkin replied that he did not have a new job since 2020, so he “paid back” his wife by taking care of the children. And, of course, he participated in the competition for the head of the ARMA.

Serhii Rokun — senior detective, Head of the First Detectives Department of the Second Detectives Division of the Main Detectives Division of the NABU

The candidate prepared a vision presentation describing how to overcome the problems and challenges that, in his opinion, the body currently underwent. Serhii Rokun began his interview with the question “Who are you without criminal proceedings, ARMA?” and ended with a slide with expectations entitled “How to make it so as not to be ashamed?” He was brought here by the realization that it was the ARMA that was able to replenish the resources of Ukraine at the expense of those who caused harm to our society.

Among the brightest ideas that we noted are the settlement of the agency and institutional goal of the ARMA, the management of corporate rights without owners, the transition to Prozorro.Sale, etc. At the center of establishing a new system of work in the ARMA should be people, values, and procedures.

Since the candidate has extensive experience in the NABU, he was asked whether he could maintain independence from this body. Rokun believes this is not an issue if the NABU influences the ARMA because it is an advanced body, and their values and goals coincide. Later, in response to a similar question, he said: “If such bodies as the ARMA were influenced by such bodies as the NABU, it would be the best thing that happened to the ARMA.” Later, the candidate specified that he meant the influence of experience of the NABU.

The commission also asked about the rapid career rise of Rokun in the NABU — what were the reasons? Rokun explained that he worked hard, took the initiative, and was not afraid to take responsibility, nothing more. All procedures were followed. The commission asked why the candidate believed he had enough knowledge and skills to run the Agency. Rokun said it was in particular due to the experience of working in the NABU because he really learned the values of this body. He calls the ability to create teams one of its undeniable advantages.

The candidate was asked traditional property questions — about the apartment of his father-in-law of 63 sq.m for almost UAH 2 mln. It turned out that this housing was bought by his wife’s mother at the investment stage, and then she exchanged it with a surcharge for another apartment — at her expense, too.

Serhii Rokun’s claim to protect honor and dignity was also covered — he was accused of allegedly false materials on nepotism. The candidate associated such previous materials with pressure due to an investigation of one complex criminal proceeding, and now — because of participation in the ARMA competition.

The interesting questions to the candidate included the one regarding his obtaining a lawyer’s certificate while working in the National Bureau — Rokun did this on weekends and holidays because he wanted to have a source of income if he quit NABU to study in the United States. Does he consider it ethical? He replied that he had thus exercised his right of access to the profession. He later suspended its validity.

It was the department of Rokun in the NABU that worked the Ukravtodor case, conducted jointly with the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau of Poland. His department raised the issue of the owners of Mezhyhirya — the Yanukovychs, senior and junior; a lawsuit in this regard was filed with the HACC last year.

Oleksandr Rudenko — attorney, Head of the Lawyer’s Union RO LEX.

Refused to participate in the selection.

Stanislav Seriohin — Head of the Central-Western Interregional Territorial Office of the ARMA.

He is confident that the ARMA should become an effective tool for bringing victory over the aggression of the enemy closer. According to Seriohin, territorial offices do not work properly nowadays, their activities are limited to the execution of orders of the central office. Therefore, the potential of territorial offices needs to be unblocked. At the same time, the candidate assured that by leading the Agency, he could achieve transparency in its work in just 7 days.

First of all, the commission asked about the reasons why Seriohin was brought to disciplinary responsibility. The candidate replied that it was about a reprimand, and he was contesting it in court. And the reason was the remark of Seriohin to his subordinate; the latter, for unknown reasons, appealed with this to the central office, and not to the court. However, Seriohin now communicates easily with this subordinate, although due to the incident, he was suspended from work for 3 months.

The commission also asked whether the candidate proposed to introduce innovative changes in the work of the ARMA. According to Seriohin, over the 3 years of work at the Interregional Territorial Office, he referred more than 5 such initiatives, but none of them were used. At the same time, his ideas for creating video reports on seized assets were very positively perceived by other ITOs, but due to the war, territorial offices were unlikely to implement them due to the rise in price of the necessary equipment.

Unlike other candidates, Seriohin’s presentation barely mentioned the attempts to deprive the ARMA of powers and liquidate the, but the commission asked about his views on solving such an issue. The candidate replied that he understood that his appointment to the post was only the beginning of the war for the ARMA because it would be necessary to prove the need for the existence of the institution in its current form. In his opinion, the strength of the ARMA is in interaction: to recover property and ensure that this property is transferred for management. If these two functions are separated, then the very purpose of the body’s existence is lost. It is also necessary to change the attitude towards the Agency, which is associated with a law enforcement institution. “The ARMA is your friend,” Seriohin said.

The commission was also interested in the personnel policy that the candidate would implement, in particular, how he would look for professional specialists. Seriohin answered that if he were appointed head of the ARMA without a team, he would repeat the mistakes of his predecessors, falling under the influence of employees. Therefore, part of his existing team can be transferred to Kyiv, and a functional audit will need to be conducted regarding other employees.

Property questions were also asked. Seriohin was asked about the Dacia Duster car, which he had bought in 2016 for a little more than UAH 90,000. The candidate replied that he had bought it abroad, it had been used, damaged and had the initial configuration, these were the reasons for such a low price.

The commission also asked how the candidate managed to buy an apartment of 52 sq. m. in a new building for only UAH 200,000. Seriohin explained that he already had another such apartment in this house, the new housing belonged to his neighbor, a minimum was done in terms of repairs; this was the cost invested in this apartment, according to the seller; moreover, this amount was adequate for apartments at the initial stage of construction in 2016-2017.

Seriohin was also asked about the scandal regarding his wife’s cakes; local media reported that the candidate helped his wife deliver orders during working hours. Seriohin answered that his wife did not bake macarons, which were mentioned in those articles. And yes, he helps her in her work, but on a voluntary basis and after hours.

And finally, Seriohin was asked about his brother who worked as a lawyer, whom the media associated with the scandalous lawyer Dovbenko. To this, the candidate replied that he had not been acquainted with Dovbenko and had not heard about him from his brother either. And his brother suspended his advocacy activities at all since he held positions in state bodies.

Kostiantyn Tkachenko — lawyer; until October 21, 2022, he headed the Department of Corporate Rights Management of the SPFU

Refused to participate in the selection.

On May 30, the Commission for the Selection of the ARMA Head will start interviews with candidates. 

10 candidates expressed the desire to head the Agency. Among them are the heads of various branches of the ARMA, a senior detective of the NABU, a lawyer who applies for all possible competitions to law enforcement agencies, an employee of the Anti-Corruption Court, an ex-deputy head of the Chernihiv Regional State Administration, a head of the Anti-Raider Office of the Ministry of Justice, a former head of the department of the SPFU. 

Traditionally, before this stage of the competition for a leadership position in such an important anti-corruption body, Transparency International Ukraine analyzed all candidates. We had questions to potential heads of the National Agency — about their property and assets, ties with russia, conflict of interest, disciplinary cases and more. Read the material to find out about other questions to the candidates.

How will the interviews go?

In general, the communication of the Commission with candidates will take place within 5 days — from May 30 to June 8. During the interview with the candidates, the professional experience, knowledge, moral and business qualities of the participants of the competition and their views on possible future activities as the Head of the National Agency will be covered.

Unfortunately, at the moment, we do not know what criteria the commission will use to evaluate candidates. At the May 22 meeting, the commission members failed to approve the criteria for assessing applicants for compliance with the moral and business qualities that are necessary for the work of the ARMA Head.

The relevant assessment rules were developed by a commission member, lawyer Dmytro Ostapenko. TI Ukraine was positive about such an initiative because we have previously emphasized the need for this step. Our organization is convinced that the approval of such criteria would allow for a quality assessment of the commission’s decision on the compliance of each of the candidates with the requirements of the ARMA Law. 

However, at the last meeting, the commission members noted that they would only rely on the developed criteria, but did not see the need to publish them and even more so to approve them.

“The ARMA competition has been going on for almost three years. However, the commission did not fully implement the best practices for evaluating candidates that had been used in competitions for positions of a similar level, for example, for the director of the NABU. We very much hope that during the interviews and when making the final decision, the members of the selection commission will be as objective, consistent, and reasonable as possible. And we, for our part, will closely monitor and analyze the course of this stage of the competition,” says Kateryna Ryzhenko, Deputy Director for Legal Affairs of Transparency International Ukraine.

What do we know about the candidates?

In total, 10 candidates have passed to the last stage. Transparency International Ukraine analyzed all available public information about them. Our experts tried to study the data, which could indicate the level of integrity of the applicants, as thoroughly as possible.

However, given that the access to the register of electronic declarations has been limited since the beginning of the war, and the selection commission decided not to publish the declarations submitted by the candidates, the data collected by us may not fully reflect the picture of the property status of the participants in the competition. 

For its part, the commission may have more information on this topic, so we hope to get a fuller picture of the compliance of candidates with the requirements during the interviews.

Artem Brintsov — Head of the Legal Support Department of the High Anti-Corruption Court. 

The scheduled time of the interview is May 30 at 4:00 p.m.

Brintsov began his career with the office of the Court Chamber for Economic Affairs of the Supreme Court of Ukraine. He also worked in the Economic Court of Cassation within the Supreme Court and as a part-time assistant of the Department of Agrarian, Land, and Environmental Law of the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine.

The mother of the candidate, Nellia Brintsova, is one of the founders of the credit union “Poltava Region.” Among the founders of this organization is the former mayor of Poltava Oleksandr Mamai. On March 2, 2023, the HACC found him guilty of organizing the embezzlement of someone else’s property by abusing his official position on a large scale and organizing the introduction of deliberately false information into official documents.

Therefore, the selection commission should clarify the relationship of the candidate’s mother with Oleksandr Mamai, as well as whether this will affect the potential fulfillment by Brintsov of the powers of the ARMA head.

Viktor Dubovyk — director of the Department (head of the office) of the Anti-Raider Office of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine.

The scheduled time of the interview is May 30 at 6:00 p.m.

In the past, Dubovyk headed the Department of Consideration of Appeals and Complaints in State Registration of the Department of Notary and State Registration of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, as well as was engaged in legal practice. He was an advisor to the First Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine, Serhii Arbuzov, from April 3, 2013, to February 27, 2014. Let us remind you that the NABU suspects Arbuzov of abusing his official position as part of a criminal organization, which led to the embezzlement of UAH 220 mln.

Moreover, from 2012 to 2014, Dubovyk was an assistant to MP Roman Romaniuk from the UDAR party of Vitali Klitschko.

The media report that Viktor Dubovyk began to build a vertical with close people in the Anti-Raider Office. He is also associated with Andrii Dovbenko, whom the HACC assigned an interim measure in the form of detention on suspicion of organizing the embezzlement of UAH 485 mln of property seized and handed over to ARMA management.

Therefore, the candidate should explain the selection commission his connections with the UDAR political party of Vitali Klitschko, Serhii Arbuzov, and Andrii Dovbenko, as well as his personnel policy in the Anti-Raider Office of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine.

In addition, it is interesting to know the position of the candidate regarding Viktor Yanukovych, during whose time Serhii Arbuzov was in power, and persons affiliated with the fugitive president.

Olena Duma — Deputy Head of the Chernihiv Regional State Administration (the last position indicated, which she held until September 30, 2021). 

The scheduled time of the interview is June 1 at 4:00 p.m.

Olena Duma at one time was the director of the Executive Directorate of the Social Insurance Fund and held senior positions in the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources, the State Registration Service of Ukraine, and the Kyiv city branch of the Social Insurance Fund. She worked in the patronage service, in particular, she was an assistant to an MP and carried out legal practice.

The candidate contested her dismissal from the Social Insurance Fund. The lawsuit was denied, but this decision was overturned by the appeal. Interestingly, the reason for the dismissal of Olena Duma was her failure to comply with labor legislation and compulsory state social insurance for the period from January 31, 2020, to April 22, 2020. 

For example, the court decision refers to attempts to illegally pay material assistance to resolve social and domestic issues, appoint acting directors and deputy directors of the executive directorate of the Fund, non-payment of bonuses to employees of the executive directorate of the Fund and heads of working bodies of the executive directorate of the Fund, and other violations.

Moreover, in the interview, the candidate stated that the ARMA did not use other legal mechanisms that could provide it with the opportunity to be granted foreign assets into management (in particular, with the right to sell). They, in the opinion of Duma, are based on the ability of the ARMA to protect its property right to manage the seized assets in civil or economic (arbitration) courts — Ukrainian and foreign. However, the candidate did not dwell upon the sources of funding for such legal mechanisms.

On September 2, 2020, the NACP drew up a protocol on Duma for the fact that she submitted the annual declaration for 2018 untimely and without valid reasons, that is, she committed an offense related to corruption, provided for by Article 172-6, part 1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. But the court closed the proceedings because during the consideration of the case, it turned out that the candidate missed the deadline for filing a declaration due to her son’s illness. 

Olena Duma also submitted documents for participation in the competition for the NABU director, but did not attend the testing stage.

It would be interesting to receive an explanation from this candidate about the violations that the temporary commission of the Social Insurance Fund established in her activities. In addition, it is unclear from public information what Duma is doing today, and what are her sources of income.

Dmytro Zhoravovych — Acting Head of the ARMA.

The scheduled time of the interview is June 1, 6:00 p.m.

Currently, Zhoravovych temporarily serves as the ARMA Head. Since July 2019, he has been the head of the Agency’s North-Eastern Interregional Territorial Department. Prior to working in the civil service, he was engaged in private legal practice.

According to the Kharkiv Anti-Corruption Center, the candidate was the head of the religious community in the Myrrhophores Church of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate in Kharkiv until November 2017. The construction of this church was financed by Oleksandr Shishkin (ex-senator of the rf, who voted for the annexation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, and a member of United Russia) and Pavel Fuchs (a Ukrainian-russian entrepreneur who has common interests in the real estate sector in moscow). At the previous interview, Zhoravovych explained that Shishkin did not finance the construction of the church, it was built at the expense of the Pharmaceutical Company Health, People’s Health, and other enterprises and individuals. However, it is these companies, according to media reports, that have russian roots.

The interim head of the Agency is systematically criticized in the media. Criticism reached such a level that ideas to eliminate the ARMA were voiced. Many of them were based on a non-transparent sale of property and the challenges posed by the management of seized assets of russian origin. For example, the register of seized assets is not available to the public. The Agency’s leadership says that access to it is limited to comply with the resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers and the recommendations of the SSU.

In the previous interview for the position of the ARMA Head, Zhoravovych explained that the Agency practiced appealing to law enforcement agencies to analyze the candidates of the managers of the seized assets. However, in response to the appeal of Transparency International Ukraine, the ARMA reported that such actions were not provided for by the current legislation and related exclusively to the “property of trade unions” at the request of the Prosecutor General’s Office. 

Another issue regarding the work of Zhoravovych in his current position is the adoption of standard-setting initiatives of the ARMA. In the previous interview, the candidate indicated that his long-term goals were to improve the legislative framework for the work of the Agency. However, none of the four draft laws on amendments to the ARMA Law (they are registered under numbers 4483, 6144, 6201, 6233) were adopted. These documents were developed precisely during the work of Zhoravovych as the head of the ARMA, and it was he who needed to advocate for their adoption. 

The candidate also reported that the Agency developed administrative regulations for the performance of the key functions of the ARMA. However, they have not been published, which does not allow the public to assess the completeness and quality of these regulations, as well as the extent to which the actions of ARMA officials comply with local regulations of the institution.

Therefore, the selection commission needs to clarify whether the candidate has any ties with the Health Corporation or persons holding positions in it. The candidate should also explain his responses to criticism and the measures taken to correct errors in the work with seized assets, for example, regarding the opening of the register of seized assets because the SSU only recommended restricting access to it, and how he plans to defend the position of the ARMA in the government and before parliamentarians so that they adopt appropriate laws to strengthen the performance of the Agency’s functions. 

The media also has information on the application of a disciplinary sanction against the head of the territorial unit of the ARMA Stanislav Seriohin, whose details will be described below. Therefore, a question arises whether Zhoravovych considers these actions as pressure on another participant in the competition for the ARMA head, and how he can explain the decision.

Volodymyr Pavlenko — serviceman; until September 27, 2021, he held the position of Deputy Head of the ARMA, lawyer.

The scheduled time of the interview is June 2 at 4:00 p.m.

Prior to joining the Agency, he worked as an advisor to the ARMA head, as well as was engaged in private legal practice.

According to the declaration for 2018, in 2016, Pavlenko acquired ownership of a garden house with an area of 33 sq. m. in Kyiv and a land plot under it with an area of 585 sq. m. At the end of 2021, before his dismissal from the ARMA, the candidate declared another right to use the same property, which belonged to Olena Dashkovska. At the same time, the income from the alienation of property to Dashkovska was not declared. Therefore, the commission should clarify this situation with the candidate.

The candidate is a suspect in a USD 400,000 embezzlement case. According to the NABU, during August-December 2020, Pavlenko, together with the Acting Head of the ARMA Vitalii Syhydyn and the head of the Asset Management Department Vakhtang Bochorishvili, in collusion with lawyers and Ihor Korol, allegedly seized funds that had been transferred to the management of the ARMA. In the previous interview, the candidate explained that in this case, ARMA employees were misled regarding the validity of the decision of the investigating judge of the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv. 

The candidate contested his dismissal from the ARMA in court. The Administrative Court of Cassation within the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Kyiv Administrative Court to recognize Pavlenko’s dismissal as illegal and reinstate him in office.

The selection commission should ask about the state of consideration of criminal proceedings in which Pavlenko was notified of suspicion and to clarify what needs to be improved to offset the risks that have become the basis for notifying him with suspicion.  

In June 2021, Pavlenko was the victim of an attack — someone shot him with a firearm, and the candidate was injured. It is necessary to clarify with the candidate what the attempt on his life was connected with, and whether this concerned Pavlenko’s work in the ARMA.

Andrii Potiomkin — lawyer; until January 2, 2020, he held the position of head of the legal department of the ARMA. 

The scheduled time of the interview is June 2 at 6:00 p.m.

For much of his career, Potiomkin worked in the judiciary, later in legal practice. Subsequently, he began to work in the Ministry of Justice — during the time of Minister Pavlo Petrenko. He started working in the ARMA in March 2017.

The managing partner of LCF Law Group, where the candidate worked as a legal advisor, is Anna Ohrenchuk. She is the wife of Andrii Dovbenko, who was assigned an interim measure by the HACC in the form of detention on suspicion of organizing the embezzlement of property seized and transferred to the ARMA worth UAH 485 mln.

There was also information in the media about the conflict between the ARMA and former employees Andrii Potiomkin and Vitalii Riznyk because of their ties with former Minister of Justice Pavlo Petrenko and lawyer Andrii Dovbenko. Those publications also indicate that it was at the request of Potiomkin that the State Bureau of Investigation opened a case against the acting head Vitalii Syhydyn about the so-called “Honcharuk films,” allegedly it was Syhydyn who secretly recorded the conversation in the prime-minister’s office.

In the previous interview, the candidate did not explain his role in the sale of three land plots in Odesa Oblast, acquired for the construction of shopping centers of the Auchan network, 2,600 tons of medium and fine sand in Kyiv Oblast, more than 4,500 tons of carbamide, grain, cereals, and oilseeds. All this property was managed by the ARMA at that time, and Potiomkin himself worked as the head of the legal department of the Agency. His colleagues, Anton Yanchuk, former ARMA head, and Vitalii Riznyk, former head of the Asset Management Department of the ARMA Staff,were served with notices of suspicion of abuse of power and embezzlement of more than UAH 426 mln.

The candidate was dismissed from the ARMA because of a negative assessment of his activities as a civil servant. By the decision of the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal, Potiomkin’s dismissal was recognized as legitimate, but this decision is still being contested in the court of cassation.

It is unknown what the candidate is doing now.

In the previous interview, the candidate provided the members of the selection commission a notice of suspicion in one of the criminal cases against ARMA officials as evidence that he was not involved in the incriminated acts. However, a question arises about the source of the notice of suspicion to another person if this document is procedural in nature, and the candidate himself seems not to be involved in this criminal proceedings.

Moreover, the selection commission should receive a comment from Andrii Potiomkin regarding his acquaintance with Andrii Dovbenko, as well as whether the latter influenced his work in the ARMA. It is also worth finding out whether the candidate initiated criminal proceedings regarding “Honcharuk films,” and in general, what financial resources he uses for a living.

Considering what Potiomkin stated about his active cooperation with the investigation into the cases of ARMA employees, it is worth further clarifying with the candidate whether he had information about the alleged acts of corruption of other employees of the Agency during the period when he headed the legal direction of the institution. And if so, whether he appealed to law enforcement agencies with the relevant notices. The statement of the candidate about the illegality of his dismissal from the ARMA also needs to be clarified because court decisions established the opposite.

Serhii Rokun — senior detective, Head of the First Detectives Department of the Second Detectives Division of the Main Detectives Division of the NABU.

The scheduled time of the interview is June 7 at 4:00 p.m.

He used to work in the Main Department of the State Fiscal Service in Rivne Oblast and the State Tax Inspectorate in Rivne.

The candidate appealed to the court for the protection of honor, dignity, and business reputation regarding the publications that referred to alleged nepotism within appointments to positions in the NABU.

Therefore, the candidate should explain the circumstances of the appeal with this claim, as well as express his assessment of the information disseminated in the publications.

Oleksandr Rudenko — lawyer, Head of the Lawyer’s Union RO LEX.

The scheduled time of the interview is June 7 at 6:00 p.m.

The candidate is a lawyer, head of the Lawyer’s Union RO LEX. Most of his career, he was engaged in private law practice. 

In 2020, he applied for various positions four times: the head of the SAPO, the Director of the BES, the Director of the SBI, and the Head of the ARMA. He also participated in the competition for the NABU Director. Prior to this, the candidate did not hold any position in the civil service. 

During the interview for the position of the NABU Director in February 2023, the commission had the most questions about Rudenko’s loan of UAH 1.7 mln, which he was granted by the Portal Bank in 2019. According to the resume, Rudenko himself is a member of the supervisory board of this bank, so the commission asked whether there was a conflict of interest in this case. According to Rudenko, this issue was decided by the bank’s board, while the supervisory board, and he personally, had nothing to do with this.

The selection commission should assess in detail the circumstances of the candidate receiving the assets. In addition, it is worth clarifying why Rudenko decided to apply for such different in their functions positions.

Stanislav Seriohin — Head of the Central-Western Interregional Territorial Office of the ARMA.

The scheduled time of the interview is June 8 at 4:00 p.m.

He used to work as a legal advisor and head of the legal department of SE Ukrainian Special Systems, as well as the head of the legal department of the enterprise with foreign capital Indrayani Overseas. Seriohin is also a lawyer.

The candidate’s brother, Oleksandr, became a member of the NACP in August 2017. The public had serious complaints about the activities of his team, which eventually led to the reboot of the Agency.

In social networks, information was spread that Stanislav Seriohin drove macaroon pastries to local cafés, which his wife made, during working hours.

Therefore, the candidate should be asked about his family ties in the context of possible influence on the exercise of his powers as the Head of the ARMA. And also to clarify the circumstances of bringing Seriohin to disciplinary responsibility, and whether he contested the disciplinary sanctions.

Kostiantyn Tkachenko — lawyer; until October 21, 2022, he headed the Department of Corporate Rights Management of the SPFU.

The scheduled time of the interview is June 8 at 6:00 p.m.

He began his career as an assistant prosecutor of the Podilskyi district of Kyiv, later worked in private companies until his appointment as deputy director of the Corporate Governance Department of the SPFU in February 2021. 

Kostiantyn Tkachenko was recommended for the position of a member of the HQCJ by the selection commission. He was also a candidate to the Economic Court of Cassation within the Supreme Court (he was the 17th of the 16 recommended). At the same time, the candidate’s wife, Olena Tkachenko, was an assistant to MP Roman Babii, and his brother’s wife, Nataliia Blazhivska, was a judge of the Administrative Court of Cassation within the Supreme Court.

Therefore, the candidate should disclose the reasons for his dismissal from the SPFU, as well as his relationship with Roman Babii. In addition, it is worth finding out how Tkachenko will make his choice if he is appointed both the Head of the ARMA and a member of the HQCJ.