The State Bureau of Investigation has opened a criminal investigation into drafting an allegedly deliberately false conclusion by a forensic expert. NABU detectives are being suspected of interfering in the drafting of the expert report in the Pysaruk-Bakhmatyuk case. That’s according to the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations. Ukrainian news reports. The pre-trial probe in criminal proceedings is being carried out by the SBI territorial office in Kyiv. The case was instituted into the drafting of an allegedly deliberately false conclusion by a forensic expert amid the alleged interventions by NABU detectives in the criminal proceedings, launched by NABU, in the Pysaruk-Bakhmatyuk case. Such an offense is qualified under Article 384 Part 2 of the Criminal Code as a knowingly false expert conclusion in a pre-trial investigation. Such actions, combined with the artificial creation of evidence of prosecution or defense, as well as those committed for profit, shall be punishable by correctional labor for a term of up to two years, or restriction of liberty for a term of up to five years, or imprisonment for a term of two to five years.
In the case of refinancing of the VAB Bank, NABU accused the bank’s ex-management of allegedly untruthful assessment of collateral property at UAH 1.8 billion. And although there were already official conclusions of the examinations performed by the Odesa Research Institute of Forensic Examinations of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine and the Kharkiv Research Institute of Forensic Examinations, confirming the correctness of the cost estimate, the NABU investigation ignored them and, conversely, referred to another examination of their own. The proceeding, opened by the SBI, concerns precisely the fact and circumstances of such an examination, the findings of which are in no way consistent with the conclusions of official examinations. The Pysaruk-Bakhmatyuk case, which was reopened by NABU in violation of the existing legislation, concerns the VAB Bank receiving refinancing from the NBU. The official findings of forensic examinations, conclusions of the Individual Deposit Guarantee Fund, and NBU statements so far refute the accusations publicly put forward by NABU to the bank’s former management and ex-owner. In addition, Oleg Bakhmatyuk, the former owner of VAB Bank, repeatedly proposed to the government to pay off the debt of the bank withdrawn from the market by the NBU decision, but has not yet received a response.