An attempted $100,000 scam: prosecutor Sviatoslav Mazuryk was caught in a scheme involving Pavlo Shcherban and Alliance Bank

18 July 2020 , 18:29
1239     0
An attempted $100,000 scam: prosecutor Sviatoslav Mazuryk was caught in a scheme involving Pavlo Shcherban and Alliance Bank
An attempted $100,000 scam: prosecutor Sviatoslav Mazuryk was caught in a scheme involving Pavlo Shcherban and Alliance Bank

The financial institution, regarding whose leaders’ ongoing criminal proceedings closure proposal in exchange for 100 thousand dollars "got caught" on June 4, 2020, by the prosecutor of the Kyiv Local Prosecutor’s Office No. 6 Sviatoslav Mazuryk, turned out to be the joint-stock company "Bank Alliance".

Information about this, as well as the detailed plot of the scandalous story of the Pechersk prosecutor who, after a short stay behind bars, was released on bail, is posted in the materials of the court registry, writes Detective-Info.

According to them, the events unfolded at the beginning of May this year, when a case was opened in the Pechersk Department of Police in Kyiv regarding the alleged official negligence of officials and members of the board of "Bank Alliance" (Part 1 of Article 367 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine).

Later, Mazuryk himself was appointed as the senior group of prosecutors tasked with procedural supervision of the investigation. On May 7, 2020, he personally came to the office of the financial institution on Sichovykh Striltsiv Street in Kyiv and handed an employee of the bank a summons for questioning as a witness First Deputy Chairman of the Board of "Bank Alliance" Pavlo Shcherban. Two weeks later, the financier visited Mazuryk’s office for questioning, after which they went out to the street together and headed towards the square.

 qhiukiuiqkqinv

(Pavlo Shcherban)

According to the investigation’s version, at about this moment, it allegedly occurred to Mazuryk how to "rip off" the bankers and make some money. The prosecutor began hinting to Shcherban that for a financial reward, he could reveal who ordered the law enforcement to "racketeer" "Bank Alliance", and also solve this problem. He said he was ready to issue a prosecutor’s order in the proceedings to close the criminal case regarding the financiers’ negligence.

(Sviatoslav Mazuryk)

To discuss these details, Mazuryk scheduled an additional meeting with Shcherban, where he stated that he could help "Bank Alliance" for 100 thousand dollars. The banker pretended to agree, but the next day filed a statement about extortion of money with law enforcement.

Subsequently, an operational combination was launched to collect evidence to expose Mazuryk’s criminal intentions. On June 3, 2020, at the summer terrace of the Kyiv restaurant "Alaska", the prosecutor met again with the Deputy Chairman of the Board of "Bank Alliance", where he confirmed his readiness to close the financial institution’s case with his own order. Additionally, he promised to continue "supporting" the bank, promising that if he received the financial tranche, competitors and the media would not learn about possible abuses in "Bank Alliance", and Mazuryk himself would ensure that no criminal cases were registered against the institution’s officials in the future.

The parties finally shook hands, and in the evening of the next day, June 4, 2020, right in the branch of "Bank Alliance" after handing the money to Mazuryk, the prosecutor was "busted". During the search of the respectable man, finances were found, most of which were imitation bills, and only 5 thousand dollars were real.

Mazuryk was detained, but he was notified of suspicion not for demanding a bribe, but for fraud (Part 2 of Article 15, Part 4 of Article 190 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine). This is related to the fact that, under the provisions of Part 4 of Article 284 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, as a prosecutor in criminal proceedings regarding officials of JSC "Bank Alliance", where no person had been notified of suspicion, he did not have the authority to issue a procedural decision in the form of an order to close the case. In this case, such a decision could only be made by the investigator.

 
Editorial Team

Elizabeth Baker

Technology & Business Editor

Print page

Comments:

comments powered by Disqus