Newly appointed top officials of the Security Service of Ukraine, or SBU, have been accused of having ties to ousted President Viktor Yanukovuych’s regime and supporting Russia’s annexation of Crimea.
The accusations have been denied by the SBU. The appointments, made earlier this week, followed the resignation of SBU Chief Valentyn Nalyvaichenko and the selection of Vasyl Hrytsak as the agency’s acting head last week. Vasyl Hrytsak’s son, Oleh, has come under fire for allegedly prosecuting EuroMaidan activists in January 2014, according to Channel 5 footage – a claim that the SBU denies.
While the SBU’s supporters argue that the agency has changed since the 2013-2014 EuroMaidan Revolution and become patriotic, critics describe it as a leftover of the Soviet Union’s State Security Committee, or KGB. It has also been accused of perpetuating the practices of the Yanukovych regime after its downfall and of being infiltrated by Russian spies.
One of the newly appointed top SBU officials, Vitaly Malikov, is deputy chief of the agency and head of its anti-terrorism center. But critics allege he used to support the very terrorists he is supposed to fight. Malikov has been accused of backing Russia’s takeover of Crimea in February-March 2014.
On January 28, 2014, Malikov, then a member of Sevastopol city council representing Volodymyr Lytvyn’s People’s Party, voted for a resolution urging Yanukovych to crack down on EuroMaidan protesters, calling them “extremists,” Sevastopol’s Seva news portal reported then.
On Feb. 26, 2014 Malikov proposed supporting Crimean Kremlin-backed separatist leader Alexei Chaly’s idea to set up checkpoints and create Russian-backed self-defense units, Olexiy Kiselyov, an ex-member of Sevastopol city council and a EuroMaidan activist, wrote in his blog on the Levy Bereg news site on April 6, 2015.
Radical Party leader Oleh Lyashko urged Poroshenko to re-consider Malikov’s appointment on June 25. “Is the SBU again run by Russian agents, just like under Yanukovych?” he wondered.
Olena Hiklianska, a spokeswoman for the SBU, denied information on Malikov allegedly supporting the Kremlin’s annexation of Crimea.
“A campaign against our new leadership has been launched,” she told the Kyiv Post. “Malikov has been in the war zone from the very beginning of the anti-terrorist operation and has shown himself to be a professional, dedicated leader. He took part in a real war and did a lot to counteract Russian intelligence agencies.”
Vasyl Zelenchuk, a member of Sevastopol city council in 2011-2014 from the Party for Fighting Corruption and Organized Crime, also defended Malikov.
“I’ve known him for 12 years,” he said by phone. “He’s an honest, decisive and competent officer and a patriot of Ukraine.”
He said he had not heard of Malikov’s supposed support of Russia’s takeover of Crimea.
Boris Kolesnikov, who is currently a member of Sevastopol’s Kremlin-backed city council under Russian occupation, told the Kyiv Post he had not heard of Malikov supporting any pro-Russian forces either.
Malikov was appointed as chief of Sevastopol’s police in 2003 under then Interior Minister Mykola Bilokon, who later fled to Russia to escape criminal prosecution after the 2004 Orange Revolution and worked at Russia’s Justice Ministry.
During the 2004 presidential election, Sevastopol’s police department under Malikov’s leadership was accused of failing to prevent or facilitating voting fraud in favor of then-presidential candidate Viktor Yanukovych. At the same time, Sevastopol police officers subordinate to Malikov were caught illegally tracking Viktor Yushchenko, then an opposition presidential candidate and later president, near the mountain of Ai-Petri.
Malikov resigned as chief of Sevastopol police in 2005 and subsequently became a deputy chief of Raiffeisenbank-Aval’s Crimean office and was elected to Sevastopol city council in 2010. In March 2014 he was again appointed by Ukrainian authorities as chief of Sevastopol police and subsequently came under fire for doing little to prevent its takeover by Russia.
Meanwhile, Luhansk Oblast Governor Hennady Moskal said on June 26 that hackers had published compromising materials accusing Malikov of corruption on his Web site.
Another new appointee – Grigory Ostafiychuk, who became head of the SBU’s main investigative department – has been criticized because he is allegedly subject to the lustration law.
Under the law, heads of regional prosecutors’ offices and their deputies who served for at least a year under President Viktor Yanukovych must be fired.
According to the Civic Lustration Committee, Ostafiychuk served as a deputy of Kyiv’s top prosecutor for more than a year – from May 14, 2007 until March 9, 2011. Yanukovych became president on February 25, 2010.
However, Hiklianska told the Kyiv Post that Ostafiychuk occupied the position until January 27, 2011 and was thus not subject to lustration. The Kyiv Post is planning to send a request to the SBU for a document confirming that he served for less than a year under Yanukovych.
The Prosecutor General’s Office has carried out a lustration check for Ostafiychuk and concluded that he must not be dismissed.
Novoye Vremya and other Ukrainian media have reported that Ostafiychuk used to be an aide to ex-Deputy Prosecutor General Renat Kuzmin, a Yanukovych ally who fled Ukraine in June 2014. Kuzmin is a suspect in the criminal case into the unlawful arrest in 2010 of Yury Lutsenko, then an opposition leader.
The Civic Lustration Committee also said in a Facebook post on June 23 Ostafiychuk had failed to explain the origin of Hr 2.39 million in revenue received by his wife, Kateryna Kolesnyk, and his family members’ real estate. Ukrainian law also envisages property lustration, according to which officials with unexplained revenues and property must be fired.
Hiklianska said Ostafiychuk had explained the origin of his wife’s revenue without elaborating.
Ostafiychuk has also been accused of nepotism since his wife works as a deputy of the main human resources department of the Prosecutor General’s Office. The Civic Lustration Committee has hinted at a conflict of interest because Kateryna Kolesnyk is in charge of lustration checks for prosecutors.
Andrei Demartino, a spokesman for the Prosecutor General’s Office, was not available by phone.
“Grigory Ostafiychuk’s story is an example of sabotage of lustration by all government agencies, beginning from the head of state,” the committee said. “Don’t ask us why lustration is being stalled, ask the president why he is the first to break the law.”
Sviatoslav Tsegolko, President Petro Poroshenko’s spokesman, and his deputy Andrei Zhigulin were not available for comment.
Kyiv Post staff writer Oleg Sukhov can be reached at [email protected]
