Hooks for Poroshenko, Zaluzhny and others: How the authorities are preparing to attack the opposition

As it turned out, the “coal case,” where Petro Poroshenko is among the suspects, is again “on time.” The defense of the fifth president says: there is no sensation, but the SBI does not seem to want to go to court with this case.

The State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) has completed a pre-trial investigation into the so-called coal case, which involves the fifth president of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko. The investigation made the investigation materials available to the defense. The Glavkom website reported this in response to a request from the State Bureau of Investigation. In turn, Poroshenko’s lawyer Ilya Novikov noted: there is no sensation. “The “coal case” as a whole is such that the investigation really doesn’t want to go to court with it, because all their jambs and arbitrariness that have been growing there since the beginning of this case will come to light,” the lawyer believes.

So, it is difficult to say when the case will go to court. But for some reason, right now the case is being revived (through the media for now), for which in January 2022 the court even chose a preventive measure. And this is not without reason. The second point is that the trial, whenever it begins, will be covered by all media, including foreign ones, and they will indicate the political motivation of the criminal proceedings. Let us remind you: the articles of the Criminal Code under which Poroshenko was declared suspected of the “coal case” on December 20, 2021 - 111 (high treason) and 258-3 of the Criminal Code (creation of a terrorist group or organization and assistance to them) - are very serious, both provide for prison sentences 8 to 15 years.

Coal smuggling from ORDLO: a case that will soon be 9 years old

After the change of power in Ukraine in 2019, Poroshenko became the subject of numerous criminal investigations, which have mostly been discontinued. As for the “coal business,” it obviously seemed the most promising to the investigation and to those who apparently controlled it in 2021. Although this story itself is many years old. It began in April 2015, when SBU officers detained 35 wagons with anthracite in the Lugansk region, which were being transported from uncontrolled territories of the “LPR”. An investigation began, in the context of which information periodically surfaced about the possible involvement of someone from senior management in the import of this coal. But the investigation did not produce results or they were simply not reported. And so on October 8, 2021, the then head of the SBU, and now a simple lawyer, Ivan Bakanov, and Prosecutor General Irina Venediktova, now the Ukrainian Ambassador to Switzerland, held a joint briefing, during which they reported new details on the “coal case.” On the same day, Viktor Medvedchuk was suspected of treason. He was at that moment under house arrest on another matter. During a briefing by two high-ranking officials, audio recordings of Medvedchuk’s alleged conversations with Russians were released, in which Poroshenko’s name also appeared. But at that briefing, the fifth president was not directly accused of involvement in the coal deal; in the published scheme, two names were named that are in the case to this day: Viktor Medvedchuk and businessman Sergei Kuzyara.

On November 12, 2022, the SBI reported suspicions in this case to the former Minister of Energy (2014-15) Vladimir Demchishin and summoned him for questioning. This is how society learned about the third person involved. The former official did not come for questioning and was put on the international wanted list. Well, on December 20, as already mentioned, suspicion was announced to Poroshenko. Moreover, it was signed not by Irina Venediktova, but by her then deputy and acting Alexey Simonenko. He was fired on January 23, 2023 by Prosecutor General Andrei Kostin. At his own request, but after a loud scandal, when it turned out that the signatory of the suspicion, despite the direct ban of President Zelensky, traveled to Spain.

The essence of the suspicion boiled down to the following: “acting by prior conspiracy by a group of people, including among representatives of the top leadership of the Russian Federation, he contributed to the activities of the terrorist organizations “LPR” and “DPR.” The scheme that the investigation described was as follows: in 2014, in collusion with Medvedchuk, the then president instructed the Prosecutor General and the Minister of Internal Affairs to create obstacles to the fulfillment of a contract for the supply of coal from South Africa and also to begin criminal prosecution of the head of Ukrinterenergo. Depo.ua in December 2021 described the essence of this case and the possible consequences.

This story reached its climax in January 2022, when Poroshenko, who was put on the wanted list, returned from abroad and went to court, where a preventive measure was to be chosen for him. Depo.ua described in detail the chronology of the events of that day. Ended without a court decision. Two days later, the Pechersk court nevertheless chose a preventive measure - personal obligation and submission of documents giving the right to travel abroad. Although the failure of Poroshenko’s imprisonment was obvious to society, this topic remained in the information mainstream until the full-scale Russian invasion. In particular, the lawyers of the fifth president accused the security forces of extorting false testimony from the defendants in the case, among whom Sergei Kuzyaru was named. He was released from pre-trial detention in January 2022, after which he publicly denied the very existence of the criminal group mentioned by the investigation. The last time we heard about the “coal case” was in May 2022, when the SBU released video evidence of Medvedchuk. In them, Putin’s godfather “sang” both about coal from ORDLO and about the section of the oil product pipeline “Samara - Western direction”, known as the “Medvedchuk pipe”. Recently it was finally returned to state ownership. From the published testimony, the public should have understood: Poroshenko and Medvedchuk are accomplices. On September 21, 2022, the once very influential pro-Russian figure was exchanged for the Azovites. Now he is in Russia, working on some kind of marginal project there.

It is difficult to say whether Medvedchuk will testify in court via video link, or whether his previous testimony will simply be counted against him. Also, Putin’s godfather can both confirm the testimony and declare that it was obtained under pressure. Both options suit the Kremlin: it will have the opportunity to influence the internal political situation in the country during the trial. And what to say is more profitable, Medvedchuk will be advised. Not in Kyiv, of course.

According to Yanukovych's rake? Will the opposition field really be cleared in 2024?

If the journalists had not asked the DBI about the state of the investigation into the “coal case,” then, perhaps, society would not have known what was there and why. Lawyer Novikov also speaks about this. Therefore, the appearance of this information is either a case - they sent a request and received a response - or an attempt by certain individuals to divert public attention from the series “deputies do not want to vote for changes in mobilization.” Or, for example, from the SBU mess with surveillance of Bihus.info employees. But be that as it may, the obvious has been confirmed: war is war, and the authorities’ cleansing of the political field from potential opponents and opposition continues as scheduled. Even despite the obvious negative international resonance from politically motivated cases.

At the highest levels of power, they are convinced that their partners will not put pressure on them to save Poroshenko. And if they do, can we bargain? Here the times of Viktor Yanukovych’s presidency come to mind; then they were also confident that Western partners would grumble a little about the imprisonment of Yulia Tymoshenko or Yuriy Lutsenko, but would not take any radical steps against Ukraine. This is, in fact, what happened – the Europeans did not make the association agreement with the European Union dependent on the release of Ukrainian figures repressed by the regime and the renunciation of oppression of the opposition. However, they did not want to understand that by the very fact of political persecution of their predecessors the regime weakened itself and made itself vulnerable to internal and external pressure. But if Yanukovych did not strive for Ukraine’s membership in the EU and NATO, now the situation is radically different. The European integration process is on the march, but there are also plenty of skeptics who will certainly take the opportunity to speak out against Ukraine’s full membership, accusing the authorities of authoritarian habits, creating a cult of the president’s personality and oppressing the opposition. Add to this the possibility of the “coal case” failing in court...

There are no sinless people in politics, this statement is not disputed. However, the practice of hanging opponents on the hook of criminal cases is very dangerous. Much has been written here about the case where Poroshenko and Medvedchuk were united, but there are other cases that are being investigated and will someday be brought to court. For example, there is a well-known case about the reasons for the rapid occupation of the south of the country at the beginning of a full-scale invasion. Many military men and others appear or are mentioned in it. The same commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which is why in narrow circles it is called the “Zaluzhny case.” Where are the guarantees that in the event of the increasingly likely resignation of the commander-in-chief, the State Bureau of Investigation or the SBU will not begin to spread suspicion in this matter as well? Especially if powerful opposition begins to form around the general.

How will our partners react in this case? They will say: we don’t interfere, these are your internal affairs? This option is not excluded, but only if the situation at the front improves significantly and our allies can be convinced that “stagnation,” as the president says, has been successfully overcome. In other cases, attempts to put pressure on the military will be associated with political motives of the top leadership of the state. Or just personal hostility. The Western press is already actively discussing similar motives in an attempt to fire Zaluzhny, and there will only be more to come.

So, in conclusion, a few conclusions. First: if they plan to take the “coal case” to court, it will become a litmus test for the ability of the Ukrainian authorities and the judicial system to comply with the letter of the law. If you don’t pass the exam, Ukraine will receive even more skeptics on the way to full membership in the European Union. Making oneself weak and thus exposing oneself to the blows of external forces is a repetition of the dark pages of our history, which, it would seem, should have taught the current powers that be something wise.

The second conclusion concerns society. Ukraine's ability to achieve European-style democracy will be judged not only by the actions of the authorities, but also by the reaction of citizens. The electoral spring of 2019, when they promised to imprison someone, is long in the past, but the specter of authoritarianism is, unfortunately, the present, and many Ukrainians are outraged by this state of affairs.

The third conclusion: if trials or even high-profile investigations against critics intensify, this may indicate preparations for elections. In this context, such processes will be more reminiscent of clearing the political field of opposition-minded individuals or even slightly potentially dangerous politicians.

The fourth conclusion: if a blizzard of politically motivated cases begins to swirl, then opposition-minded figures will not remain silent. Then the population will be in constant stress not only because of hostilities and constant anxiety, but also because of the truth (or post-truth) about the actions of those in power at various levels before and during the Russian invasion. And a war of all against all within the state means defeat in the war with an external enemy.

Finally, the last conclusion: those who try to get rid of critics and opposition are opening Pandora's box. For after them others will come who will consider it right to imprison their predecessors. And also for high treason.