Tuka: Sanctions against Parimatch may be a consequence of refusing to pay corrupt security officials

Possible link between sanctions and blackmail

Former Deputy Minister for Temporarily Occupied Territories Georgy Tuka drew public attention to the potential testimony of former senior SBU official Artem Shilo. According to Tuka, this testimony could shed light on the pressure exerted on the company Parimatch. He emphasised that if the version of using the sanctions mechanism to extort money is confirmed, the state needs to thoroughly establish all the circumstances that preceded the adoption of the relevant decision.

Georgy Tuka expressed this view on his Facebook page, commenting on a post by Volodymyr Boyko. The latter mentioned the possible testimony of Artem Shilo regarding the blackmail of Parimatch and the realities of introducing restrictive measures against the company.

Context of Artem Shilo's case

Tuka recalled that Artem Shilo, who previously held a high-ranking position in the SBU and worked as an advisor in the Office of the President, reached a plea bargain with a prosecutor from the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office. The court sentenced him to eight years in prison but released him from actual serving of the sentence, establishing a three-year probation period. Under the terms of the agreement, Shilo is obliged to provide incriminating testimony regarding other individuals.

The former Deputy Minister believes that it is precisely this testimony that could help clarify what happened immediately before the introduction of sanctions against Parimatch.

Pressure on the company and lack of evidence

Georgy Tuka noted that as early as March 2023, representatives of Parimatch publicly reported pressure from certain SBU employees. The company complained about the blocking of financial payments, pressure on banking institutions, and threats of opening criminal proceedings.

At the same time, Tuka emphasised that official evidence of Parimatch's activities on the territory of Russia has not yet been made public. He stated:

"Якщо підтвердиться версія, що компанія отримала санкції просто після відмови платити корумпованим силовикам, потрібно з’ясувати весь шлях від вимагання грошей до державного рішення" (If the version is confirmed that the company received sanctions simply after refusing to pay corrupt security officials, it is necessary to clarify the entire path from money extortion to the state decision), he noted.

Responsibility for the sanctions decision

Recalling his experience working at the Ministry for Reintegration of Temporarily Occupied Territories, where his ministry prepared proposals on the application of sanctions, Tuka noted that he understands the responsibility behind such decisions. He is convinced that sanctions must be based on verified information, evidence, and specific grounds, as the entire state pays for possible errors and abuses of reputation.

The former official also mentioned precedents when, in his words, Members of Parliament "traded" sanctions, and the relevant case was referred to court.

Threat to international reputation

Georgy Tuka emphasised that the possible use of the sanctions instrument for private enrichment poses a threat not only to a specific business but also to Ukraine's international image. He explained that Ukraine is seeking sanctions from international partners against Russian business, accomplices of the occupation, and individuals who help the aggressor bypass restrictions. However, each case of abuse of these mechanisms can undermine trust in Ukrainian evidentiary materials.

"Він дає справжнім пособникам Росії можливість заявляти, що санкційні списки складаються під чиїсь комерційні інтереси. І шкода від цього виходить далеко за межі однієї компанії" (It gives real accomplices of Russia the opportunity to claim that sanctions lists are compiled to suit someone's commercial interests. And the damage from this goes far beyond one company), Tuka concluded.

It is worth noting that the version presented by Tuka regarding the existence of a link between the pressure on Parimatch and the introduction of sanctions requires confirmation.