Official of village council in Odesa region detained for overpayment for shelter repair

The police have served a notice of suspicion of abuse of office to the head of a department of a village council in Odesa Oblast.

According to the press service of the Main Directorate of the National Police in Odesa Oblast, the case concerns the repair and arrangement of a school shelter (basement) in the village.

According to the investigation, the contractor entered false information into official documents regarding the scope and cost of the work performed. In turn, the head of the village council's department signed the documents, which resulted in the transfer of extra UAH 350,000 from the budget to the company's accounts. In early September, the contractor was notified of suspicion in this case.

Currently, the head of the department of the village council has been notified of suspicion under Part 2 of Article 364 (abuse of office) of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In early September, the contractor was also notified of suspicion. His actions are classified under Part 4 of Article 191 (misappropriation of property through abuse of office) and Part 1 of Article 366 (forgery) of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.

If proven guilty, the official faces up to six years in prison, and the contractor faces five to eight years with disqualification to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for up to three years.

What motivates officials to cooperate with dubious contractors in such a difficult time and on such important objects, and whether they understand all the risks that such cooperation entails, journalists of the Center for Public Investigations tried to find out.

In September and October of this year, according to the public BI Prozorro analytics module, budget managers signed almost two dozen contracts for the repair of civil defense facilities (shelters) in educational institutions. All contracts were concluded without a tender. This could be explained by the desire of officials to carry out repairs as soon as possible and order them from trusted companies. However, both motives are questionable. First of all, the customers "managed" to repair the shelters before the start of the school year, instead of taking care of it in the summer. Second, they ordered the work from compromised companies.

Кирило Бойко