Last year, the NABU accused Volodymyr Orlov,First Deputy Head of Dnipropetrovsk RMA of extorting and receiving a bribe, and the case will be heard by the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court on March 18. However, Orlov claims that the case against him is fabricated, and the indictment says "the victims are absent" and "the damage is not established." It seems that the case is beginning to fall apart, and the NABU insists on further investigation.
Volodymyr Orlov himself laid out in an interview with Ukrainian News his vision of what lies at the heart of the case and also who and for what purpose, in his opinion, is trying to imprison the former official.
Last year, the NABU accused you of allegedly demanding a bribe for allocating land tobuild a boarding house. At the same time, information is spreading that you yourself have become a victim of slander. What is your view of this situation?
Just a few days ago, on March 11, I received an indictment and finished reviewing the materials of the pre-trial investigation. So, I can already provide certain comments without violating the secrecy of the investigation.
To summarize the case, I did not receive any funds and did not make any decisions regarding the allocation of 19 hectares of land to the enterprise. Also, none of the RMA employees heard instructions from me to prepare a draft order for such a document. When they brought such documents to sign (and such facts existed), I refused.
But there is an indictment. What evidence do you see in it to support the claims that the case against you was fabricated?
Yes, there is a lot of interesting things in the indictment itself. At least such phrases as “there are no victims” and “the damage has not been established”. We also received a response to the lawyer’s request. According to it, we were supposed to be provided with confirmation that the detectives allocated funds to transfer to me as an illegal benefit in order to take it, so to speak, “on the spot”. There is no such document. This is yet another proof of the falsity of the accusation, which even the detectives did not take seriously, because they understood that I was not going to take any money.
Among the important data is also the testimony of the director of the company, who was interested in renting those 19 hectares of land. The NABU agent Torop, whom I have known for a long time as OleksiiHonchar, allegedly worked in the interests of this company. So, she testified that she did not know either Torop or Honchar. Actually, she did not know any of the RMA employees or me. This particular land issue was dealt with by the company's representative OlehPodenko. During the interrogation, he also confirmed that he was not familiar with Honchar-Torop.
So, wasthe situation around you created artificially?
Probably so. In fact, there was no bribe, the state and the company did not suffer any losses. The only thing that exists is the applicant, who was supposed to provoke me to take the money. However, this did not happen of my own free will.
What goal do you think the NABU is pursuing with such actions?
In my opinion, the case is a fabrication. The NABU's task is to discredit me as a civil servant, as a citizen of Ukraine. The detectives used a classic provocation for this. However, it was precisely because of my position that they were unable to bring it to its logical conclusion, even under ideal conditions for them.
You reported that the prosecution allegedly does not take your testimony into account…
We filed a motion to close the criminal proceedings twice. I just realized that this is a waste of time in this system, because such letters are returned with formal replies. The motions to conduct investigative actions were partially denied. Instead, Honchar-Torop testified that his old acquaintance Hennadii, who is currently abroad, asked him to take on the issue of land lease. There are contacts of this person in the case, but the detectives did not even establish his identity. Although we insisted on this.
Surprisingly, no one looked for Hennadii and did not find out what his role was in the case. At the same time, the NABU is asking for an extension of the pre-trial investigation, referring specifically to the need to interrogate this man. And in a private conversation, the detective asked the question: why should we look for him? They say that if you search for everyone, you can find Adam and Eve. Everyone understands that the case was falsified, but no one is going to play it back.
What is known about the only clue to the accusation in the case against you - OleksiiTorop? Negative information is currently spreading about this person’sreputation. How true is it, in your opinion?
I knew him for a long time as OleksiiHonchar. Now I know that he changed his last names. He was Karpenko, Shevchenko, and now Torop. However, I had no idea about the dark side of this person before, although I had been communicating with him since 2011. Honchar presented himself as a powerful businessman. I was not very interested in what he did, because we were just friends. However, I understood that Honchar was a "solver" of certain issues. Already after the case was opened against me, his friends began to contact me and share details about Honchar - criminal proceedings, and the search in Russia and about his fraud in Ukraine, for which he has two charges under Article 190. These cases are still in the courts. By the way, in 2021 he was detained precisely for land fraud for $ 1 million. In another case, the amount was $ 700 thousand, that is, he was spinning quite large funds that he took from people for nothing.
Has Torop-Honchar been involved in cases similar to yours?
I was surprised to find that Honchar was the plaintiff in the case against Oleksii Salnikov, the head of the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine. He offered and gave a bribe for solving a certain issue, after which Salnikov was detained by NABU officers.
Perhaps you are familiar with the circumstances that prompted Torop to testify against you?
When we last spoke, Honchar complained about money problems. He said he had four children and that his wife had left. He said that he rented housing in the residential complex "NovopecherskiLypky", which is a pretty penny, but he had to pay almost UAH100,000 for kindergarten every month. After that, he began to offer me the assets of Kostiantyn Zhevaho, namely the mining and processing plant. He assured me that he had access to his managers who were in London. This was not the only offer from Honchar. After that, he also talked about the possibility of buying equipment from the Russian enterprise "Ukrtranskontainer" and an open pit in Bila Tserkva. I was not interested in this.
In general, there was a long period when we did not communicate with Honchar. He appeared again at the end of 23. He hinted that he had problems with law enforcement agencies, and to avoid the consequences, he joined the ranks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and is serving in Donbas. He asked for help for the military. On this request, I gave him a thermal imager, a car and food. No matter how strange it may seem, in the materials of my criminal case there is even a letter from the commander of the military unit that received this help.
How do you explain such proposals of Honchar-Torop?
Now I understand that it was an attempt to catch me in some way. When that didn’t work, Honchar had a new idea – to persuade me to sign documents on granting a land plot to one of the enterprises of Dnipropetrovsk oblast for a long-term lease,which, in fact, led to the court case against me.
You talked about the commissioned nature of the case. Do you have any suspicions about who is behind this?
Since the end of 2023, I have been repeatedly directly hinted that the NABU is “hunting” me. I was surprised, because my position is a category “B” civil service, which is not within the competence of the NABU to monitor. However, the head of the regional military administration, Serhii Lysak, spoke about this personally. I answered him frankly: if it is necessary for me to leave, I am not against resigning. But Lysak then said: “You suit me.Work”. I did not expect to see his testimony in the case materials later after these words. In them, he wrote that in his opinion, I did not meet the qualities that the first deputy head of the RMA should have. We have worked together since February 2023. And in my opinion, he does not look like a person who would tolerate a subordinate, and even more so, a first deputy, who does not suit him. But we have what we have.
Do you think that Torop-Honchar could have worked in collusion with your boss Lysak?
We can only guess about his connection with Honchar-Torop now. However, it looks suspicious that the fraudster with Russian roots was too knowledgeable about what was happening in the regional military administration. He knew the details about the company that applied to the administration for land lease, and the refusal to do so. As I said earlier, Honchar was exposed in fraud in 2021. This was done by SSU employees. And as you know, Lysak is an active employee of the Service. There are many facts about the head of Dnipropetrovsk RMA, but I do not want to voice them, at least until the court hearing.
However, I can say that in view of them, at the end of July 2024, I decided to resign from the position of his first deputy of my own free will. This was a deliberate step and exclusively my personal decision.
If you left your post, why do they want to imprison you so much?
After my dismissal, I had several job offers. I wasn’t going to rush, but on the eve of serving the suspicion on October 23, 2024, I received a call and was told that my candidacy was being considered for a leadership position in one of the regions. And in the morning, NABU detectives appeared on my doorstep. Is it a coincidence? I don’t think so.
Do you think that false accusations of corruption are increasingly becoming a method of settling scores in Ukraine? Is it the elimination of competitors, or the demand of officials to make the right decisions?
When you read about it in the news, you just wonder ifsuch things can happen. However, when you find yourself in the epicenter of a fabricated case against you, you look at everything from a different angle. Now I can clearly see what the NABU is like. You have to understand that it is a structure on which not only Ukrainian taxpayers' money is spent. Americans and Europeansare investing in it. Instead, the Bureau monitors not what it should, but controls those it wants to or those it benefits to control.
What are your reasons for saying that?
Look at the cases that are now under investigation. There are a lot of cases where material was collected back in 2016 and 2019. That is, the detectives were documenting something, but the papers were sitting on the shelves, waiting, in my view, for their time or political necessity.
That's what happened in my situation. The conversation with Honchar-Torop was in May, and the NABU didn't visit me until five months later, when I was fired. What does that mean? That there was a political need to turn me into a toxic personality. To "fix," so to speak, my reputation in the way certain people want.
Will you defend your rights in the European Court of Human Rights if Ukrainian Femidaside the prosecution?
We have already studied the case law of the European Court. You can be sure that we will move to the end. We will use all legal methods to defend justice. Why not? The actions of the NABU detectives, who used against me a friend of mine, are illegal. They have all the signs of provocation. In addition, unproven provocation, because I did not take any funds and did not take any illegal decisions. This is a fact that I hope we will be able to prove in Ukraine, if not then in the European Court.
Who we are: About us, Contacts. How we write news and our principles: Editorial code. We did our best. If you found this valuable – please support us.
To request a correction, please send an email.