The Ghost of Chernovetsky in Kyiv. Who is taking two hectares from the military in the center of Kyiv?
On March 27th, the Supreme Court will once again begin hearing the dispute between the Ministry of Defense and two companies: “LV-Holding” and “Imperial”. The subject of the conflict is a land plot that the military received in Kyiv back in 1951, but during the chairmanship of Oleksandr Omelchenko, the city sold this plot to a developer, and its purpose for office-residential construction was changed when Leonid Chernovetsky became mayor.
The developer, as reported by the media, is associated with Chernovetsky’s son-in-law at that time, Vyacheslav Suprunenko, with whom the former mayor’s daughter later divorced. Therefore, the Kyiv City Council is also a party to the case.
The scheme in this story is quite typical: first, the developer purchased buildings from the Kyiv Housing and Utilities Department, which were located on the disputed plot, then leased this plot, and then bought it from the city.
As law enforcement officials report, the buildings were subsequently demolished so that skyscrapers and commercial premises could be erected on the entire land plot. And the Ministry of Defense is now spending years in courts proving that the city sold not its communal land, but state land, the disposal of which is not the right of local council deputies.
The civic initiative “Golka” was investigating the details of the case proceedings in the courts.
The Ministry of Defense and the Kyiv Housing and Utilities Department insist that this plot in Pechersk, with an area of over 2 hectares (address of the plot: Kyiv, Rybalska Street, 24/16), is not communal but state property. Therefore, the local self-government body – the Kyiv City Council – could not sell or transfer it to anyone without the government’s consent.
The decision of the executive committee of the Kyiv City Council in 1951 to establish boundaries for the military town of the Kyiv Military District Housing and Utilities Department at Rybalska Street.
The case has been dragging on in courts of various instances for six years now. The Supreme Court has sent it back three times so that judges of lower instances could better study the details of the case.
But even from those interim decisions of the Supreme Court that have already been issued, the facts are clear: this plot belongs to the defense lands and is the property of the Ministry of Defense. Therefore, the local council could not alienate this plot because it is not communal but state-owned.
After the Supreme Court returned the case for a new consideration, the appellate instance finally acknowledged that the land plot belonged to the state. The Northern Appeals Commercial Court (judges: Antonina Malchenko, Olexandra Ahrvkova, Tetiana Kozyr) issued a decision at the end of last year, according to which the Ministry of Defense won the case.
And now, in the cassation, developers are trying to appeal the decision of the Northern Appeals Commercial Court. The judges comprising the panel of the Cassation Commercial Court that is reviewing this case are: Vitaliy Zuyev, Inna Berdnik, Ivan Mishchenko.
There is also a monument of national importance on the plot – Bastion No. 5 of the Kyiv Fortress. And since the issue concerns cultural heritage and Ministry of Defense lands, the interests of the state are represented by the military prosecution.
Bastion No. 5 of the Kyiv Fortress, photo: office.ua
The head of the Department of State Representation in Court of the Specialized Prosecutor’s Office for Defense Matters of the Office of the Prosecutor General, Viktoriia Shekshieieva, notes:
State Secretary of the Ministry of Defense Lyudmyla Dorogan emphasizes:
In the Kyiv City Council, which is also a party to the case, they also acknowledge that these lands are indeed not communal but state-owned. Secretary of the City Council, Volodymyr Bondarenko, emphasizes this point.
The land, which in 2006, according to the decisions of the Kyiv City Council, was subsequently resold multiple times by LLC “LV-Holding”. In 2011, the owner became LLC “ZhK «Imperial”.
And then this company “ZhK«Imperial» later mortgaged this plot to “Asvio Bank”, controlled by the Suprunenko brothers, under a financial obligation of 105 million UAH. At the same time, “Imperial” also mortgaged this same plot to GPP Developers Ltd under a financial obligation of $20 million. GPP Developers Ltd was also associated with the Suprunenko brothers. This was reported by “Nashi Groshi”.
The surname Suprunenko appears so frequently in this story not by chance. Vyacheslav Suprunenko was not just a deputy of the Kyiv City Council from the bloc of Leonid Chernovetsky, but also Chernovetsky’s son-in-law, under whose chairmanship the purpose of this plot was changed.
Vyacheslav also has a brother – Alexander. He was a member of parliament for the Party of Regions.
The story with the plot in Pechersk is not the only land scandal associated with the Chernovetsky and Suprunenko families.
For instance, a part of the square adjacent to Michael’s Square (now Heavenly Hundred Square), with numerous violations during Chernovetsky’s tenure, ended up in LLC “Green Plaza”.
Nebesna Sotnia Square, photo: hmarochos.kiev.ua
And here the traces once again led to the son-in-law of the then mayor – Vyacheslav Suprunenko. Here the developer planned to build a hotel-office complex.
The developer’s project that he planned to implement on the site of the current Nebesna Sotnia Square. Photo: Dmitry Hnap’s Facebook page
The legal process lasted four years, and the Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the developer’s appeal and returned the land to the community.
Specially for “Glavkom“
