The NABU has targeted another agriculture minister: who stands to benefit from this?

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine has initiated an investigation concerning the Minister of Agricultural Policy, Vitaliy Koval, due to media reports claiming that he resides in an apartment valued at 17.7 million hryvnias, which is registered in the name of his pensioner mother-in-law. This was reported by "Slidstvo.info", as noted by UNN.

Details

Journalists published an investigation on September 23, asserting that Minister of Agricultural Policy Vitaliy Koval lives in a 170 square meter apartment in an elite residential complex. According to their findings, the apartment belongs to his mother-in-law, a 69-year-old pensioner who likely did not have an official income to purchase it. The estimated value of the property is 17.7 million hryvnias.

NAKU stated that they are "taking measures to identify unjustified assets and gather evidence of their unjustifiability."

However, it remains unclear why this issue is being addressed by NAKU and not by the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption (NAPC).

Vitaliy Koval was appointed as Minister of Agricultural Policy and Food on September 5, 2024. Previously, he led the Rivne Regional State Administration for four years and then served as the head of the State Property Fund for nearly a year. Nonetheless, NAKU only became interested in him after his appointment as Minister of Agricultural Policy.

Before Koval's appointment, Taras Vysotsky acted as Minister of Agricultural Policy, and prior to him, the position was held by Mykola Solskyi.

Interestingly, both of them are also subjects of criminal investigations led by NAKU.

Vysotsky is suspected of involvement in abuses related to two pasta procurements at the onset of the full-scale invasion. Meanwhile, Solskyi is implicated in orchestrating the appropriation of land belonging to the National Agricultural Academy in the Sumy region for transfer to military personnel in the ATO, although this occurred back in 2017, long before he assumed the role of minister.

Both cases appear rather dubious when analyzing the evidence base. For instance, NAKU suspended the criminal investigation against Vysotsky altogether in August.

The investigation against Solskyi is ongoing, despite having lasted more than 5 years since 2019.

According to NAKU, the lands that Solskyi, as a lawyer, helped ATO participants acquire were allegedly under the use of state enterprises NAAN ("Iskra" and "Nadia"), and thus could not be transferred to ATO participants. In their arguments, although detectives and prosecutors refer to a copy of the State Act issued to the Stalina Artel, where "Stalina Artel" is crossed out and "Iskra" is handwritten, they themselves are skeptical about such evidence.

The original of this document has not been seen in any state body—neither in NAAN, nor in the Institute of Agriculture of the Northeast, nor in the State Geocadastre, nor in the Romny District State Administration of the Sumy region (where the disputed lands are located).

Moreover, the Supreme Court and judicial expertises have already refuted the anti-corruption agency's version that these lands are indeed related to NAAN.

At the same time, the expertise commissioned by NAKU in this case was reportedly attempted to be concealed and annulled by detectives. There is a possibility that it could indicate Solskyi's innocence.

It is not definitively known why NAKU detectives decided to announce suspicions against the then-serving Minister of Agricultural Policy Mykola Solskyi only in May of this year, nearly 5 years after the investigation commenced, but experts see signs of political persecution in this case.

Recently, there have been frequent statements regarding the loss of independence of anti-corruption bodies in Ukraine. This was also asserted by the recently dismissed first deputy director of the bureau Gizo Uglava. He has repeatedly hinted that decisions in NAKU are influenced by external factors rather than being based on the law.

Similar opinions are held by lawyers, who have also claimed that the real aim of the anti-corruption officials has shifted from fighting corruption to exerting pressure on certain public officials to achieve "external" goals.

It is possible that in the cases of the "persecution" of agricultural ministers, NAKU may actually be following directives from international partners who finance a separate power block in Ukraine. Why do Western partners want this? There are several plausible explanations:

• The grain corridor. By pursuing former agricultural ministers, pressure can be exerted on new ministers regarding decisions on grain exports, quotas, or cooperation with certain foreign companies.
• The opening of the land market. International companies may have interests in privatizing land plots in Ukraine, and thus the Minister of Agricultural Policy is needed to influence "necessary decisions."
• Competition among candidates for the ministerial post from international partners. Currently, appointments are primarily controlled by Ukrainian authorities, but international partners have begun to seriously compete with them for high-ranking positions.

Thus, although the persecution of ministers may appear as an attempt to combat corruption, in reality, it could be an internal struggle for influence, geopolitical, and economic interests of international structures.

So far, for instance, it remains unclear why Solskyi's case intensified simultaneously with negotiations with the Poles. And why, shortly before reaching a resolution with the Poles, NAKU announces suspicions and the Poles formally withdraw from negotiations, leaving the situation "suspended" to this day. Some market players lean towards the opinion that NAKU detectives intentionally played into the hands of the Poles.

Incidentally, reasonable timeframes for the investigation into Solskyi are coming to an end in December, and convincing evidence of guilt is still lacking.