The Court resolved the fake case of Yankovsky

Information may not be reliable

27, March 2017: Pechersk district court in Kyiv satisfied the suit of Mykola Yankovsky, the owner of “Stirolbiofarm” LTD against the owner of the website yankovskiy-leaks.com. The information published on the website had been declared misleading and offending the honor, dignity and business reputation of Mr. Yankovsky. The relevant judgment was issued on December 22, 2016.

It is to remind that it’s not the first time when similar publications aimed to “prove” a relation of Ukrainian businessman to the terrorists of so-called “DPR and LPR”, appear on doubtful resources; however, in all similar cases the Court and investigation bodies have already proved the absurdity of the published allegations.

In particular, in summer 2016 the Investigation Department of the Main Administration of the SSU in Kyiv and Kyiv region ordered that neither Mr. Yankovsky, nor “Stirolbiofarm” or other related enterprises had committed any actions aimed at financial or material support of the “DPR”. The criminal case was closed due to the lack of corpus delicti.

At the same time, investigation found out that in 2014 “Stirilbiofarm” LTD took all measures, prescribed by Ukrainian legislation to transfer its activities to the territory controlled by Ukrainian public authorities; however soon after that the equipment, premises and production of the enterprise were seized by militants. This fact was confirmed by the decisions of the Kyiv City Appellate Court. The decisions prescribe that between May and July 2014 illegal military formations obtained the ownership over the property of “Stirolbiofarm” and used it for their own benefit.

It’s well known that after seizing of “Stirolbiofarm” raiders registered the enterprise with the same name in the territory of the “DPR” with new owners and management. The activities of the new enterprise caused spreading of misleading information by some mass media on the so-called financing of terrorism by “Stirolbiofarm”.

There are grounds to believe that militants carried out information attacks against Mr. Yankovsky within a common scenario of “legalization” of the seized property. In order to “export” to Russia, a new “management” was forced to re-register “Stirolbiofarm” at least at the relevant bodies of the unrecognized republic, but before that – to discredit the name of the legal owner.

The NSDCU decision on the temporary suspension of carrying goods across the separation line in Donbas, enacted by the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko on March 16, 2017, has to put an end to speculations over the activities of Ukrainian assets seized by terrorists. According to the President, enterprises in the occupied territories were declared “confiscated”; thus, legal owners don’t have any relation to their current “activities”. The denial of this fact is in favor for the militants and constitutes another element of the information war against Ukraine.