As soon as the active hostilities near the capital calmed down, the prosecutor’s office, instead of cleansing up traitors and collaborators, returned to the old fabricated criminal cases.
Last week, the Holosiivsky District Court of Kyiv City considered the request of the investigation to apply a preventive measure to the Client of VB PARTNERS.
The Client – the General Secretary of the Ukrainian Football Association (UAF), who is suspected of embezzling the Association’s funds received through the agency company Newport Management LTD.
Despite of the circumstances, we have another victory in this “war” of Ukrainian football with the investigation, which continues for more than three years.
The motion of the prosecutor for the arrest of the Client with a multimillion-dollar bail was rejected. Instead, the court implied a restraint measure in the form of personal commitment.
Currently, the Client continues to fulfill his official duties in the Association and is focused on the preparation of the joint application of Ukraine, Spain and Portugal to host the 2030 FIFA World Cup.
Our lawyers have gathered much evidence of the absence of a basis for the charges against the Association’s officials. A key examination has been carried out in advance. Also, we proved that the investigation falsified the materials of the proceedings, in which the representatives of the UAF were served with suspicions.
Our colleagues – investigators of the Сorporate Investigations Practice have checked all transactions, including those in foreign jurisdictions (Republic of Cyprus and BVI). The investigation showed that there were no links between the UAF and the agent company.
Our work continues – attorneys continue to form the evidence base to close the case, as well as to record the abuses of the investigation that took place during the investigation.
* Let us remind you that 2 years ago we received a similar result in another important case for the football community. At that time, the investigation also illegally prosecuted the top manager of a company that manufactures turfs for world-class football fields. The court agreed with our arguments. Instead of taking the Client into custody with an alternative bail of UAH 98 mln the court applied personal commitment. This was later cancelled, including the lifting of restrictions on the Client’s freedom of movement.