AMCU investigation and criminal case: Ust-Dauna port has not yet been handed over to the winner of the auction
[ad_1]
The winning company of the privatization auction for the Ust-Dunai port has still not received the purchased objects for use due to the refusal of the State Property Fund to sign the relevant act and an open criminal case.
This was stated by the lawyer of Elixir-Ukraine, the winner of the auction, during the conference dedicated to the five-year anniversary of the Prozorro.Prodazhi system on Friday.
The port “went off the hammer” on auction January 17. The winning bidder, Elixir Ukraine LLC, agreed to pay 201 million hryvnias for the object – three times more than the starting price of 60 million hryvnias. The company says that they paid the full amount to the state budget in April.
“The investor is ready to accept the object, invest and develop the cargo flow, develop the Danube shipping in the conditions that the grain corridor is not working now,” says the company’s lawyer. “But there is an obstacle – a criminal case is immediately initiated for obvious reasons.”
According to YouControl, the owner of the SE “Ust-Dunaisk Sea Trade Port” remains State Property Fund. The port consists of three assets: the port itself in the city of Vylkovo, Odesa region, the “Kilia” port office, and the service base for special lighter carriers on Shabash Island.
Company representatives declined to comment further. According to the data of the court register, in 2023 there was a court decision regarding the port regarding a single criminal case No. 947/19824/23. However, Elixir Ukraine is in the case does not appear
The main problem in the company was that the deed of acceptance and transfer of the object has not yet been signed, and “accordingly, the investor does not have the opportunity to get the object into operation and start operating with funds.”
According to the Elixir Ukraine representative, the regional branch of the State Property Fund does not sign such an act without the consent of the Antimonopoly Committee for concentration. The company believes that in this case such consent is not mandatory according to the law, but admits that “officials want to play it safe and require this consent.”
“And the AMCU is starting an investigation that is incomprehensible to us as a buyer. And according to the nature of the questions that are being asked, there are no questions for the buyer. And the question is about how the state put the object up for privatization. From the point of view of how the AMCU asks the question, in principle, the project itself is in doubt,” said the representative of the company.
Read also: The first privatization of a sea port in Ukraine: why Ust-Dauna port is against, and the state is for
[ad_2]
Original Source Link
