Executive car BMW-7 dark blue stop on Bankova Street near the building of one of the parliamentary committees. From it emerges governor of Dnepropetrovsk region Igor Kolomoisky.

He came to the closed session of the special control commission on privatization, which is headed by one of his fellow MP Boris Filatov.

– I will testify about Chechetov and talk about the London court – he answers in the course of the reasons for his participation in the meeting of the Commission.

Kolomoiskiy visit came as a surprise to most members of parliament – they found out about it a few hours before the meeting. According to them, Dnipropetrovsk Governor People’s Deputy volunteered to tell about how unfair privatization took place in the past.

In the end, the keynote speech Kolomoiskiy before the commission became illegal privatization of the state holding “Ukrrudprom”. Kolomoysky uncut talking about agreements with Leonid Kuchma and Viktor Pinchuk, called bribes and insisted on the need to review the results of privatization.

It’s no secret that with Kolomoisky Pinchuk now find out the relationship in the High Court in London regarding the purchase of Krivoy Rog iron ore plant. Viktor Pinchuk requires Igor Kolomoisky and Gennady Bogolyubov recognize his own factory and compensate for losses. Echoes of these trials have long been heard in Ukraine – the oligarchs have solid media resources, do not disdain to use it to achieve their goals. From this perspective, the emergence of Kolomoiskiy on Wednesday at a meeting of the commission – no surprise.

At the same time, sales of enterprises’ Ukrrudprom “really – one of the most enigmatic and controversial in the history of privatization in the independent Ukraine. It involves virtually all major countries oligarchs – Rinat Akhmetov, Viktor Pinchuk, Vadim Novinsky, Igor Kolomoisky himself and his business partner, Gennady Bogolyubov, which due to a specially prescribed conditions of privatization tenders were able to acquire important raw material assets. They have become a base for the formation of, for example, the largest vertically-integrated metallurgical holding “Metinvest”, which is controlled by Akhmetov and Novinsky now.

Publication details privatization “Ukrrudprom” could provoke another redistribution of property in the country. And Igor Kolomoisky in this story claims the role of conductor.

To your attention a transcript of the meeting of the Special Commission on Privatization and a short interview with Igor Kolomoisky reporters after her graduation.

Kolomoysky: We have an official record?

Filatov: Yes, we have the same public meeting, right?

K.: Just to know what to say (laughter).

Thank you for the invitation. I am very pleased to have this meeting. Very waited meet your commission on privatization. Because it sounded statements that all stolen from 2010 to 2014 – during the reign of Yanukovych, and prior to that? But before that were egregious.

Only one of them ended positively for the state. It’s about “Kryvorizhstal”.

The idea of ​​the return of stolen and illegally privatized property back into public ownership could not find a response. But I want to say on the subject matter: I would like to come to the committee and to report on what is happening in 2003-2004. We all live in Ukraine, and all these scandals were publicly. Despite the fact that during this period of freedom of speech in the country was not very good.

In 2004, privatization took place “Ukrrudprom.” In my opinion, it was held illegally. But time passed and nobody will recall. And in 2013, an event occurred. I found it outrageous. Viktor Pinchuk filed a lawsuit in a London court on me and my business partner Gennady Bogolyubov.

The lawsuit says Pinchuk that bought my company Krivoy Rog iron ore (KZHRK). Allegedly he deal with us, and we sold him this company.

In fact, he treated the English Court extortion, which relied for Kuchma for signing the law on Privatization “Ukrrudprom.”

As a result of the signing of this law, the state has lost control packets, blocking stakes Southern Mining, Dry bar and KZHRK.

I do not know whether it is constitutionally the law on Privatization, which at some point violated the rights of other participants in terms of privatization.

The essence of the law was that the purchase of these enterprises have the right to only those who have been at the time of privatization of 25% of one of the companies belonging to the “Ukrrudprom”.

That is so limited for those wishing to participate. As I recall, restricted the right of participation of the plant named after Lenin. And Vladimir Boyko really wanted to participate, to buy some company. But he was not given. At that time he did not have 25% in any of the companies that were part of “Ukrrudprom”.

This is an important question. Because even now estimated enterprises that lost state today with a bad market is estimated at $ 10 billion.

It turns out that Ukraine goes around the world, looking for money. Goes to the difficulty to get the IMF loan, which will be spent on increasing the external debt, and with stolen from the State or, shall we say, illegally privatized nobody wants to do anything.

All events are described in detail in my testimony with Bogolyubov in a London court. Interpreted not only as Pinchuk extorts from us return of the bribe. But he does not say that it is a bribe, and that the money he allegedly offered for KZHRK.

short story sporav London court looks
In fact, he asked for bribes, Kuchma proposed for signing the law on Privatization.

Because if he did not sign, the 300 votes for the bill would not be collected. Leonid Kuchma, as the guarantor of the Constitution, was to veto this shameful law.

That’s like asking such questions include whether the jurisdiction respected the privatization commission, and whether it will consider it?

Then I will prepare all the documents with the details and chronology. As the bill was approved in first and second reading, who was responsible for it, someone who was carrying money, and so on.

Maybe this will be based on an ad hoc investigative commission Rada. Perhaps materials get finally a GPU. Last Attorney General, with whom I spoke on this subject – Vitaly Yarema. But in six months, he has not moved. He had more important things, you know – the investigation of the Maidan.

So much for the “Ukrrudprom”, but I have a lot to you, then tell. Question – how much you are willing to listen to it and continue to move (smiles).

Boris Filatov: Igor, let’s “Ukrrudprom”. We have formed a committee is a good way to solve problems. That is, we have taken all the initiatives of the Commission members. We collectively make decisions, try to meet any requirements. Who is the initiator – the kind of question and answer. My deputy Paul Rizanenko introduced this issue (the investigation legality of the privatization of assets “Ukrrudprom” – UP). I think Paul will lead the working group on this issue, and you’ll be working with him. (Laughter).

K.: I would like to summarize that was clearly understandable. I contend not just as an outsider, but as a direct participant in the events and one of the beneficiaries of this privatization.

Privatization “Ukrrudprom” was originally conceived so as to limit the number of participants for future possible privatization, and for this to fall into certain hands.

Paradoxically – invent one, and fell into the hands of others. Because pass the bill in the first reading, and think of it did not participate in privatization. They prepared a law for themselves. That is, we all play football, and Germany is winning. In the privatization of all involved, and buys exclusively Akhmetov.

It turned out that the law benefited from other people on the premises, including me. But when Pinchuk went so far as to London with the help of justice continue to extort bribes for Kuchma!

He tried to extort them with us using the administrative resource, owned by Kuchma, from August to December 2004.

Then in December 2004 to a period he tried various criminal structures to do it. It did not happen, and in the end he went to the English court. There they opened my eyes, to the point that it is – extortion. I believe that we will process it if not centuries, the show trial of the Kuchma era. If Pinchuk not withdraw the claim. And there is a risk that it would withdraw.

Victoria Voytsitskaya, MP, faction “Samopomіch”: Why do it then do it at all, his motivation?

To: It? Greed, greed. I think greed, but I do not want to be responsible for Pinchuk

Victoria Voytsitskaya: We had the only successful re-privatization. How do you see the way when it is clear that privatization was illegal in one form or another? That the state should do with such objects?

To: I believe that the path chosen in 2005, was a difficult and wrong. Each company had to go to the Commercial Court, cling to details, nuances, to prove that something is wrong.

My opinion about your question – if it is initially criminal groups for pre-planned plan privatized and withdrawn from public property, and simply steal or buy at a lower price some company …

I would have brought it back with the help of nationalization and expropriation – a separate law about nationalization. As there was a separate law on Privatization, just a separate law on the peculiarities of re-privatization or nationalization.

The law I would have returned the money paid for the state-owned enterprise, if FAC and the GPU does not prove the offense.

This is the punishment of the current rate. Suppose bought for a penny – just 100 million UAH YuGOK. And here it is necessary to return the money. According to the current exchange rate is a punishment.

If it is proven that this crime and criminal conspiracy, then there should be expropriation – no refund no money to repay the loss to the state.

Can I parliament to such actions – the question. We are talking about companies of strategic importance. Their one-two and a handful. On two hands are not enough fingers. More?

Take the period 2010-2014.

This Dneprenergo. It was stolen twice. For the second time in 2012. In my opinion, if privatization was 25%. The bag being deliberately divided into two parts. The state was 50% + 1 share. That is deliberately divided into two parts and sold Akhmetov 25%. By the time he owned 40%.

We sued, there was even a Supreme Court decision. Because Akhmetov lend to businesses, then the debts in the bankruptcy process turned into action. It was illegal even then – we can not convert debt into shares, and he did it. Once spent emissions and got about 40%.

Our company “Business-Invest” received the decision of the APU, which was not carried out and the arrival of Yanukovych they canceled it.

In Dneproblenergo with privatization began the same situation. In the winery and Zakarpatieoblenergo when even Lvivoblenergo removed from the auction.

That is, we clearly stated that Yanukovych specifically evoked potential buyers, and to say that here we have a system people with systemic interests, so do not go too much – “War Axe-chump, snow fall, all will be dead!”

Even in the narrow club electricians were limited those who are more right-wing and left more. This applies Dneproblenergo, Dniproenergo ( privatized DTEK Rinat Akhmetov – UP ), Vinnitsaoblenergo ( is controlled by Konstantin Grigorishin ), Zakarpatieoblenergo, ( is controlled by Igor Tynnym, according to media reports, bought in the interests of Sergei Liovochkin – UP ) Volynoblenergo, Zahidoblenergo, Kyivoblenergo ( controlled by the Russian VS Energy – UE). With the latter I do not remember – something was bought at a privatization tender, but the basic package was formed. In general, any privatized and came to power, it was here in this way.

Donbasenergo ( Donetsk company was acquired by businessman Igor Gumenyuk in favor of Alexander Yanukovych – UP ) is also taken away.

They both started in 2011 to privatize, so we just read about it as a summary of the ATO area. There Firtash bought several regional gas every day, no one else was involved in the competition, and DTEK buying power companies and generation.

Well, there were other privatization for the 2010-2014 year, quite daring. You can take a look at the list. This is because of the large enterprises, small thing, nobody cares.

As to the time prior to this period – from 2005 to 2009 there was only one story – we participated in the privatization of Odessa Portside Plant. There hammer hit, and then it all Tymoshenko blocked.

But we do not intentionally judged not to escalate the situation, because we have this venture was not particularly necessary. But some Russian dolezli, and we did not want them to give it away. Because they had gained control of the transhipment, the oxygen would have blocked all other plants.

But today is a company if they give someone cheaper 5 billion USD, of course we will be against it. We then recall their rights.

Another important point – during the reign of Yanukovych was held in the parliament important law. Its essence – if since privatization took three years – nothing can be done.

That’s why I talked about Zakhidenergo Yarema, but he did nothing. We were forced to sue themselves – from “Business-Invest”. Because there will expire on January 10 Zakhidenergo three years. 12 or March 13 – three years Dneprenergo. Claims in the public interest must submit or GPU or SPF, but they do nothing. This question can be discussed with Parfenenko. Do you want to approve? ( as the head of the State Property Fund – approx. UP )

F: No, no, we do not want to approve it. We ask the president to approve any chairman of the State Property Fund that was not the acting.

To: Chechetov no longer there? It wanted you to notice. Can black humor, but the trends that have occurred to him and Valentina Semeniuk-Samsonenko …

Let the police investigate, but I believe that there is a minimum of incitement to suicide. Because they knew all the secrets of privatization. Moreover – Valentina Semeniuk was going to be a witness on my part in the London court.

I do not want anyone to cast a shadow – the case of the investigating authorities. But in principle, they could tell a lot of things about privatization in the country. Who called who use the phone right, who called on HF, who for a hundred, who for dvuhsotki.

If we return to privatization, I believe that the most egregious examples – “Ukrrudprom”, “Krivorozhstal”, “Nikopol Ferroalloy Plant”. By the way, this is also the question would be to Semeniuk. Why it did not take on its balance sheet in the registry otsuzhennye state action? And waited until Pinchuk then through the APU seized all.

Paul Rizanenko: I’m surprised. Because I was the initiator of the work of the Commission to include the issue of privatization “Ukrrudprom”, and I’m surprised that Igor has come up with a performance.

K.: has issued a confession. (Laughter – UP)

Igor Lutsenko: There are two options approach – take or pay. Do you think that you should choose?

K.: The question of how to pay will always rest on the evaluation.

Assessment today and in 2008 – is different. Then it was 40-50 billion dollars, and today it stands at 10. You will have to pay a price to take – at the price of 2008 or 2015?

If we talk about the economy, we opted for the privatization of enterprises of category A and B. Ore enterprise always earn and make money. They are the backbone of our industry valyutoemkoy.

We all understand that emerged from the Soviet past – the economy will not be competitive due to the fact that we give up one mine and metallurgical plant – to another. Here one buyer and the seller.

What I always touches in relation to “Ukrnafta” and “Ukrtatnafta”. Everyone says that the state’s share is in “Ukrnafta”, but forget that in “Ukrtatnafta” too. Percentage difference – only 7. Earns still “Ukrtatnafta”, but she did not pay attention. Because the difference in the price of oil. But another question – there are natural resource industries, and has processing, and all was well balanced in the Soviet economy that excess ore and metal was not.

If you take between surcharge or returning of – I think it’s better return. Because these companies will never be at a loss if it does not want the state.

Voytsitskaya: In Parliament debated the question of privatization in 2015. You, as a businessman, you can answer the question – what is the estimated value of the assets in Ukraine – given the political and economic risks? 2015 – the year of privatization?

To: No, this is the year of re-privatization. Today is the time for the buyer, not the seller. Today we must all buy – the market is cheap.

Therefore, to sell today – madness. This is the first one.

Second – privatization – a means of getting rid of inefficient state ownership and transfer of its effective owner. Sorry for the tautology. But! In no way privatization is not a means of replenishing the state budget, it is an additional measure. We have also made the country with a shortage of money to sell anything. Bad time – when prices are low, that is, we put the damage to themselves and future generations.

Selling strategic assets, we put the state on the brink of survival. What we are seeing over the past year. When it was quiet, peaceful – no wonder, as we now have the state from the economic point of view there.

Sergei Leshchenko: I have no doubt that we are like-minded on the issue of restoration of justice when re-privatization, but tell me – you, too, were the beneficiary. Question about 5 million per month, you pay Pinchuk in 2004 – do you think that it was a bribe or not? If the bribe is voluntary surrender of you?

K .: We know that the one who gave a bribe and a first-come, said this – he is nothing for it will not. (Laughter)

A: So you admit that the management “Ukrnafta” gave $ 5 million a month?

K.: Yes.

A: Who is on what account?

K.: All provided in an English court, can provide all here. These accounts are identified as accounts Pinchuk Kuchma.

L .: Offshore?

To: Yes. But it is not “Ukrrudprom” and “Ukrnafta”. But it’s not just the money. We paid the money, and in addition to pay dividends to the state and taxes. But for the right to receive dividends, we were forced out of their dividend pay even 5 million Pinchuk.

L .: How do you like the idea, if we create a temporary investigative commission Rada “Ukrrudprom” and “Ukrnafta”?

K.: Awesome! I will testify. But you did not create! You call someone and say that it is impossible. And even consider “Ukrnafta” ready even before “Ukrrudprom”. Because by “Ukrnafta” has materials that do not require evidence. There is a payment order, the identification of the client is who the owner of this campaign. All finished materials. And the statute of limitations issue.

Voytsitskaya: A dividend “Ukrnafta” when we get?

To: never get.

Q: And why is that?

To: And you think why. And you know how much “Naftogaz” should “Ukrnafta”?

B: have no idea.

A: 10 billion.

To: 10,5 bcm of gas they stole.

Q: What do you mean “stole”?

To: It is they who have reflected on their balance sheets as a gas producer unknown. That is “Ukrnafta” produced gas, pay rent, all costs, gas hit the gas transportation system, and they are currently recorded in the parish of “unknown manufacturer.”

This “unknown manufacturer” to 2 billion a year and added gas was fed into the system, and they have him safely under the guise of the budget of 50% + 1 share shall have the right to give the public at prices set by NERC.

But do you think they give us the prices paid by NERC? 300-400 USD, they give us a penny not paid. If we look at cost at the time, it’s about 40 billion USD. But if I return at least 10 of them, I will pay dividends not only the state, and private shareholders and dividends. They – in this particular I, including. You are here vain laugh, your name Leshchenko, not Ljashko.

Q: Rada Audit Commission found that the gas is actually $ 2 billion for the 2013-2014 year was not even included in the balance of “Naftogaz”.

K.: No, we do not take 2013-2014. We now consider the situation with regard to the letter of 5 billion dollars from 2006 to 2010. Then, in 2011-2013 there was a more or less normal – some gas, they put some back for some paid. ( Turning to Leshenko ) so I’ll catch up on that – when the Commission?

L .: Its creation initiates the Parliament, I will subscribe under Resolution .

K.: Let’s questions, I do not often come. What else do you want to discuss?

A .: Case Karpenko.

K.: (Noise) Do not, do not! Leshenko say then that I fainted.

I wrote in 2005 that it is fully triggered Karpenko Viktor Pinchuk and his chief of protection – a Konstantinovsky Victor N., in which one of the defendants was an agent. And they have done all this, prepared and executed, and Karpenko was just a tool. Was originally to be Migulya partner Karpenko, and then turned Karpenko.

But I do not have a lot of evidence, because I am unable to carry out the investigation. I know only one thing – at the time when the arrested attackers Karpenko, a signal of their detention did before it was attacked.

With all my demonization in 2003, I did not have such resources – to call the police and detain the person who done nothing. But they have been waiting for. This is – in the case file, the first investigation was in hot pursuit. And some information emerged. So let’s think about who possessed such power in 2003, is to perform. And most importantly, what motives? Karpenko – some mediocre lawyer, we knew it, it worked for us. We once kicked out because he did not work well. And what is the motive, why we need it?

L .: Revenge.

K.: And how many lawyers I then had to take revenge if management revenge? How many lawyers in this country should be less then if I take revenge on each of those who are working against me? We have lawyers poredeyut and institute did not have time to release as many specialists.

Filatov asked not to turn the meeting of the Commission in the booth and went to the other items on the agenda.

After the meeting of the Commission Igor He agreed to answer some questions of journalists.

– People’s Deputy of the “Popular Front” and each Yatsenyuk Andrew Ivanchuk is your business partner?

– Let’s just say, not directly. There is a certain company in which I have an interest, and Ivanchuk have an interest. But there is an independent control, and I do not interfere in it, a portfolio investor.

– The company is called “Techinservice”?

– Yes … Yes, I do not know the name. But like the same “Techinservice.” We once said that soon we will have all the eco-fuel, and it is necessary to stake out the area. So we staked, lost money, and then entered the excise and the eco-gasoline nobody produces.

– Do you often call Ivanchuk?

– Yes, we communicate. We have a good relationship, sometimes swear.

– Ivanchuk blocked because law quorum in “Ukrnafta”? In your best interest?

– So I keep quiet and say nothing. Here is the massacre of around 50% + 1 share, why are you like? To manage as “Ukrgasdobycha”? To Eremeyev ( Igor Eremeev – one of the owners WOG – UP ) plundered another company?

– No, Georgians can put any.

– And today we have a Belgian work there! Yes Belgian or Georgians exactly one week will be mine. Do you know why? Because I’m doing and constructive for the enterprise. Because I’m in this enterprise, to earn money and passing the state.

– So you do not pay dividends to the state!

– In what sense? And the fact that I gave 130 billion Naftogaz free, there are 65 billion of my money at all, you have not thought about this?

This is talking about 10 billion cubic meters. There is a Supreme Court decision to write off in our favor, that they should return “Ukrnafta”. I even proposed a variant of the settlement agreement. That is the state in the face of NAC robbed “Ukrnafta” a certain amount of time and pick up $ 10.5 billion, let private investors also for 15 years will take away these billions. And to equalize chances.

No – return 5 billion us or pay for 5. Return for all 10. But NAC has no money. So I have a question – I extract oil and gas, and gas for free give “Naftogaz”. After all, “Ukrnafta” was constantly feeding trough, and NAC constantly sawed the money, since Bakay and ending it myself Igor Didenko.

– Are you ready to change management “Ukrnafta”? There was a suggestion to this effect Yatsenyuk.

– Yes, we care! Give us any director and let it work. Here is a question for you: adopted 50 + 1. And what is today the state received in a falling market “Ukrnafta”? Nothing happened. And in “Ukrtatnafta” lost? I could make a collection of “Ukrtatnafta” without the state before? No. The state was 43%. Quorum is not going to. I, for example, you need to hold the solution in “Ukrtatnafta” some, such as to write off the oil Transneft, I had to do it without the state could not, and now I can not.

– Kurchenko oil will not give?

– What is the oil? Yes, he’s just an idiot this Kurchenko.

– you record your conversations with him ?

– Yeah, it’s not I write and write Liovochkin Pinchuk. You listened to my conversation with Yanukovych? He told me at the beginning of December 2013 says that now is not the main Liovochkin television and Klyuyev.

– Why do you file a complaint about the privatization of “Zahіdenergo.” Do you want to fight with Akhmetov?

– We have filed a lawsuit against Zakhidenergo and Zakarpateenergo. We do not pretend to any assets.

– A Dneprenergo? You fought for it.

– We were there 0.15%. We are not fighting for it, and for justice. The law says that you can not convert the debt into shares, then everyone should have that right.

We can not say that we all play football, and Akhmetov while still in volleyball.