Parliament ignoring EU banking norms - lawyer
Honored Lawyer of Ukraine, lawyer Volodymyr Bohatyr has said that the parliament is implementing legislation that alienates European integration.
This is stated in the article of the lawyer on the Law and Business website, which is devoted to the analysis of the implementation of the constitutionally fixed course of the state on the acquisition of full membership of Ukraine in the European Union.
A controversial example between the declared course and the quality of lawmaking is the provisions and practice of applying the law adopted this year 3111-IX on improving the procedure for withdrawing the bank from the market under martial law contradict European norms and may become another obstacle to Ukraine's European integration.
The lawyer recalls that even during the adoption of this law, inconsistencies were indicated both in the Main Scientific and Expert Directorate of the Verkhovna Rada Administration and in the Main Legal Directorate of Parliament.
In particular, we were talking about provisions according to which the Deposit Guarantee Fund should not reimburse funds placed on deposit with the bank by a person to whom sanctions are applied. Parliamentary lawyers also complained about the proposed norms for the mandatory withdrawal of a systemically important bank from the market in the event of falling into the sanctions lists of its owners.
In this case, those who suffered damage or losses were entitled to their compensation solely at the expense of the aggressor states. But parliamentarians could not propose an effective mechanism and laid down only declarative norms that potentially threaten the interests of depositors.
Lawyers of the Verkhovna Rada clearly indicated that such an approach contradicts Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as well as Article 5 of the Directive 2014/49/EU of the European Parliament and the European Council of April 16, 2014 and multiple practices of the ECHR.
Bohatyr notes that the actual lack of legal policy in the state when seizing property and ignoring the recommendations of lawyers by parliament on the need to determine the order of competence of foreign, especially European investors - will lead to catastrophic consequences in the form of investment claims against Ukraine.
He draws attention to the fact that the executive authorities, in particular the Deposit Guarantee Fund of Ukraine, the Ministry of Finance and the National Bank supported this bill despite the fact that it contradicted European norms.
"Therefore, with the full support of the executive, MPs allowed themselves to ignore the fundamental comments on the problems with acquis of the EU from their scientists and lawyers and on the second attempt adopted the law," the candidate of legal sciences notes.
The NBU decided to withdraw SENSE BANK from the market, and the Deposit Guarantee Fund introduced a temporary administration.
From a legal point of view, the situation around this bank, according to the lawyer, is of a conflict nature, since at the time of actual expropriation, on the one hand, the shares of the bank were under judicial arrest, and on the other hand, they belonged to a sub-sanction shareholder, which looks like the alienation of sub-sanction property. On the other hand, the creation, existence and powers of the Federal Tax Service are currently the subject of consideration of two cases in the Constitutional Court of Ukraine.
This example indicates that the current composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine during the adoption of laws deliberately ignores the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the practice of the ECHR, which is supported by the Cabinet of Ministers and executive authorities - emphasizes the lawyer and draws attention to the fact that no one is politically responsible for the systemic nature of such violations.