Vitrenko: National Agency of Corruption Prevention’s order is inconsistent with the law and will be challenged in court

The National Agency of Corruption Prevention’s recent claims regarding the alleged violation of Article 26 of the Law of Ukraine “On prevention of corruption” must be addressed to the courts and not to the Chairman of the Supervisory Board of NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine
The National Agency of Corruption Prevention’s recent claims regarding the alleged violation of Article 26 of the Law of Ukraine “On prevention of corruption” must be addressed to the courts and not to the Chairman of the Supervisory Board of NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine, argues CEO of NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine Yuriy Vitrenko.

“Why doesn’t NACP apply to the court to terminate the relevant contract? Why does it instead play politics? And for whose benefit is this being done? It is not clear why the National Agency did not exercise its legal right to appeal to the court, but chose instead to churn out orders which deliberately aggravate the conflict it created,” he commented.

According to current legislation, NACP doesn’t have powers to respond to to alleged violations with orders when applying articles 26 and 27 of Law of Ukraine “On prevention of corruption”.

Part 2 of article 26 of Law of Ukraine “On prevention of corruption” clarifies that violation of paragraph 1 part 1 of this article regarding restriction of the conclusion of an employment contract is reason to terminate the relevant contract.

Entrepreneurship deals made with violation of requirements of paragraph 1 of part 1 of this article may be invalidated.

At the same time, in case of detection of violation provided for in the 1st part of this article, the National Agency of Corruption Prevention must apply to the court to terminate an employment contract or invalidation of an agreement.

Other news