The firm of pro-Russian banker Omelyanenko claims lands in Kyiv’s Obolon district

The firm of pro-Russian banker Omelyanenko claims lands in Kyiv’s Obolon district

Over 160 million UAH were funneled through a scheme involving the state-run "Ukrgazbank" and the company "Kyivmiskbud-1". An old story involving former banker and "regional" associate Omelyanenko has gained new momentum during the war: the dispute over the complex of buildings and structures continues legally. The fate of already three plots in the capital’s Obolon, which is presumably claimed by a firm associated with former "kyivmiskbud" representatives, is to be decided by the court.

So are people affiliated with the notorious former banker Oleksiy Omelyanenko truly involved in the questionable scheme of "unlawfully seizing" Obolon lands in Kyiv? And what is the "Russian link" here? Details in the investigation by "StopCor" journalist Ihor Dotsenko.

The territory being litigated by interested parties is substantial: a production complex covering 8,600 square meters in the Obolon district of the capital. The legal dispute continues to this day.

However, this tangled story began during Yanukovych’s term.

In those days, Mr. Omelyanenko headed the pro-government "Party of Regions" faction in the Kyiv City Council and was also on the supervisory board of "Ukrgazbank". Besides that, the banker engaged in charity work, but mostly supported the churches of the Moscow Patriarchate.

However, journalists speculate that Omelyanenko generously funded "Russian Orthodoxy" with state funds. As law enforcement discovered, between 2008 and 2010, the figure, in collusion with a director of "Ukrgazbank," orchestrated a scheme to siphon off budgetary funds.

According to the investigation, the funds were issued as loans to the accounts of fictitious enterprises owned by Oleksiy himself. These funds were then transferred from these pocket structures to offshore accounts. Meanwhile, the bank loans were never repaid.

But there were other schemes too. One was disclosed by the Economic Protection Department of the National Police: "By transferring money for renting premises that the bank did not actually use and conducting repairs in them, 39 million UAH was transferred to the accounts of a pre-established controlled enterprise," the report says.

What is known about the case directly concerning the disputed Obolon lands?

Yes, in early October 2008, "Ukrgabank" issued a loan to "Kyivmiskbud-1" for 164 million UAH. And the trust, in turn, pledged non-residential premises on Lebedynska Street, 6 as collateral for this loan.

Since the loan was not repaid, the production complex was recovered for the debt by court decision. Ultimately, the owner of the buildings and structures complex became "Ukrgazbank", which put it up for public auction.

And in 2021, the firm "Lebedynskyi Konsult" purchased the aforementioned property - the auction is indicated as having taken place in the OpenMarket system. But later, the company, as the new owner of the object, found out that besides them, the right to the complex’s ownership was being claimed by a certain company "Epika-2017".

This company was established in March 2017. And within a month, the company bought a share of the complex for almost nothing - only 100 thousand UAH. Meanwhile, the authorized capital of this company is even less - one thousand UAH.

How could this happen?

As journalist Ihor Dotsenko notes, in 2017, strange manipulations begin with real estate and land in Obolon. And this is despite the fact that the land plot at this address is communal, meaning it belongs to the territorial community of Kyiv represented by the city council.

According to the data from the State Register of Property Rights, private notary Oleh Boyko decided on state registration of rights and encumbrances in April 2017, under which the company "Epika-2017" registered the right of private ownership of the complex of buildings and structures at: Lebedynska Street, 6. Note: not the entire plot, but only a part of it. The basis for these actions is indicated as a certificate from the BTI, stating that the property was registered with the private company "F.F.-Service" supposedly way back in 1998.

It should be added that representatives of the Kyiv City Council assure that the ownership for the specified real estate object by "F.F.-Service" on the basis of a 1998 purchase agreement was not registered. Under the specified registration number for the non-residential fund, another property’s ownership was registered at a different address.

And according to the register books of the CP "Kyiv City Bureau of Technical Inventory", for the address in Kyiv, Lebedynska Street, 6, property ownership for a production complex was registered for another legal entity within the non-residential fund.

Does this indicate a fictitious contract?

The situation was commented on for "StopCor" by expert lawyer Eduard Dyachenko.

"If there are no details in the BTI... our electronic registries began operating in 2014, and now not all details from the BTI have been transferred to the state registers. So if the registry doesn’t have the owner’s details, they must be in the BTI, because this contract should have been registered somewhere at that time. If it was during the 1990s-2000s, then specifically in the BTI," he explains.

Why then does the lawyer for "Epika" refer to an invalid contract of another company? Journalists reached out to the company’s leader Stepan Ukraintse. He promised to comment later but stopped responding on the day of the planned meeting. And when called, he postponed the conversation again.

"But instead of answers - there’s more ignoring. Strange behavior for someone confident in the legality of his actions. It seems that the head of the company accused of document falsification really has something to hide," concludes Ihor Dotsenko.

What about the legality of land division?

Strangely, one land plot was turned into three separate ones. According to the lawyer, there can be many speculations about why this was done. Perhaps to make the land plot, which had a single cadastral number, cease to exist, or maybe to sell it cheaper.

"You can divide it into 10, into 100 parts if you’re the owner. If you’re not the owner, then there will already be questions for the state registrar. How did you divide this land plot if the person is not the owner?" highlights Eduard Dyachenko.

However, these suspicious activities were conducted not only notarially but also physically. Reporters captured on video how unknown persons break down gates and then seize the land plot by illegally placing construction trailers and materials on the site.

But despite all the above facts and evidence, "Lebedynskyi Konsult" has lost in court twice already.

Could influential connections of Mr. Omelyanenko, who knows how to emerge "unscathed," have played a role?

After all, the case in which he was suspected of conspiring to siphon off hundreds of millions of state hryvnias from "Ukrgasbank" seemingly ended in nothing.

Initially, the banker was detained for two months with a bail of 90 million UAH. Strangely, within a few months, the bail amount decreased by 30 times. And then Omelyanenko was released "under personal obligation," without paying any bail. Furthermore, no electronic bracelet was put on him, nor was his passport seized for safekeeping.

Media speculates that Omelyanenko might owe his quick release to the help of priest friends from the Moscow Patriarchate. It’s no coincidence that the ex-regional founded a pro-Russian public organization on the territory of one of the monasteries.