Arms wars and New Year’s gifts: how 23 billion were taken from disobedient Bezrukova and given to border guards
The end of 2024 looks like it will be a year full of arms scandals. No sooner had we recovered from the news that the 120th mine had been sent to the frontline that did not explode, which was the fault of journalists, the military, the rain, but not the manufacturer, than another betrayal was delivered.
On the penultimate day of autumn, 29 November, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine adopted Resolution No. 1191-r, which allocated UAH 23 billion for the purchase of shells for the State Border Guard Service. The initiator was the Ministry of Defence.
In fact, what is written in the decision is a bit surprising: that is, the Ministry of Defence, which spent 2 years creating the Defence Procurement Agency and received considerable funds from the budget to pay the agency's employees, at the end of the year, dumps 23 billion hryvnias on the State Border Guard Service to purchase weapons for the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
At the same time, the State Border Guard Service will not use this money to buy weapons for itself, but again for the Ministry of Defence.
At this point, a logical question arises: either the Agency is not working well, or the Agency will not buy goods in this way and will most likely never choose such a seller.
Let's start with the first version. Is the Defence Procurement Agency performing poorly? If you go to a smoking room or to some of the offices of the Ministry of Defence, yes. But it is necessary to clarify what exactly this "bad" is. Apart from chronic hatred of a particular person.
And here some difficulties arise because no official claims have been made. Although the ministry hints in every possible way that the audit will not be good for the head of the DPA.
Dana Yarova, a freelance adviser to the Deputy Minister, tried to voice unofficial claims in an attempt to merge the DPA and the SLO into one agency on Boryslav Bereza's show. With significant inaccuracies - in particular, she increased the budget for the maintenance of DPA by 200 million, to 650 million, instead of 450.
In an interview with "Ukrainska Pravda", Bezrukova herself explained what the audit claims against the DPA were.
"The auditors believe that the Agency's money spent on its maintenance is treated as budgetary. And, according to budget legislation, there are certain restrictions on certain expenses. That's why they accuse us of exceeding the funds spent on cars and business trips," she said.
"Although we have clarification from the State Treasury that the money earned by the Agency in the course of its activities and used for its own maintenance is not budgetary," Bezrukova added.
Marina Bezrukova, photo by UP
The second comment was "a lot of intermediaries". After that, the DPA made an infographic showing how the procurement structure has changed. Almost 60 per cent is accounted for by the Ukrainian market, 23 per cent by imports, and 18 per cent by special importers.
But the MoD is not satisfied with Bezrukova's work. Unofficially, she is accused, among other things, of not having spent 100 billion by the end of the year. In fact, this is not true, because a significant part of this 100 is what the Cabinet of Ministers has allocated in the latest budget amendments. And this money is barely a month old.
But the amount of 23 billion is what was the "working fund" (this money was not used for budgetary obligations) of the DPA and could have been used for new contracts.
Instead, this money will go to the SBGS.
"The story is that the DPA did not make budgetary commitments for these funds and did not provide the Ministry with information on how they plan to use them, so the money was transferred at the request of the State Border Guard Service. Moreover, they had already received money from us in the spring," a source in the ministry says.
"In addition, ask how many times the head of the ammunition department has been replaced. It's a new person every month, who can't say anything because he needs time to get acquainted with the situation," the source adds.
The less literary version of events is that at the last Commander-in-Chief's meeting, the Ministry was "raked out" for problems with the supply of ammunition. Firstly, that the contracts for the Ukrainian manufacturer were broken (here we are talking not only about the 120mm mine, which does not fly and does not explode, but also about two other nomenclatures with problematic contract performance). Secondly, the fulfilment of some contracts by "Spetstechnoexport", which was Ukraine's largest specialised importer until the autumn, is in question. Now this position is being taken over by "Ukrainian Armour".
That is why border guards were entrusted with this crucial mission.
And now we have to deal with the next logical question: who will supply the State Border Guard Service?
After all, it is quite logical to assume that the agency in question did not come to the MoD asking for 23 billion with a basket of violets. But with a stack of documents.
The supply contract will be awarded to the Polish company "PHU Lechmar".
This is an intermediary company with a structure similar to Ukrainian "padding", where the owners are involved in dozens of other organisations.
Interestingly, the company apparently has a long history of relations with the Ukrainian government, as the author also found news about the company's supply of high-explosive shells.
... and the Cabinet of Ministers' resolution of 2021, which allows the Ministry of Defence not to enter into an offset contract with the company.
Offset agreements are a special type of contract that provides for compensation to the Ukrainian party when entering into an agreement with a foreign company. It is also provided for in the Defence Procurement Law. In the case of procurement of defence goods, works and services by import from a foreign legal entity for an amount exceeding EUR 5 million, a prerequisite for such procurement is that Ukraine, represented by an offset beneficiary, receives the relevant compensation.
This is the company through which the DIU went to the Bohunskyi District Court of Zhytomyr to challenge the veracity of what was written in a certain telegram channel.
In addition, as far as the author knows, last year, under the leadership of Volodymyr Pikuzo, the State Enterprise Defence Procurement Agency signed a state contract No. 21/3-95-DK-23 with this Polish company.
By the way, it happened at the end of the year. The company was to supply a rather substantial batch of 155 mm rounds with an M107 projectile worth €2,750.00.
It is worth noting that the 155 mm round with the M107 projectile is the "basic" round, i.e. the cheapest option in the range of artillery rounds of this calibre. The price Pikuzo contracted for was not the most attractive on the market, but the delivery time was very attractive - within 2-5 months.
In other words, in the spring of 2024, Ukrainian artillerymen were to receive their first shells.
In fact, a year has passed and no deliveries have been made. As far as the author of the article knows, back in winter, the company applied to the DPA for replacement of the fuses, and since this required approval from the customer, i.e. the General Staff, in the spring, PHU Lechmar sp. z. o.o. informed the Agency that the goods had been sold to another end user.
At this point, the story began to resemble the scandal with another Polish company, Alfa sp. z. o.o., which, having contracted with the MoD directly, then decided that it was more profitable for it to be an intermediary company for "Progres", selling ammunition at a much higher price.
It is worth noting that at the end of 2024, PHU Lechmar sp. z. o.o. made an offer to supply 155 mm rounds with M107 projectiles at the same price of EUR 2,750 per round, but in a much larger quantity.
However, this is not all. The Polish proposal contains a number of other nomenclatures worth more than UAH 100 billion.
And in a number of positions, for example, the price for the 120-round is close to the market average, while for the 152-round it is close to the highest offer on the market.
In addition, the foreign supplier requires a 100% prepayment.
And everything would be fine, if not for the aforementioned failed contract with DPA, and before that, the contract with the state-owned special importer "Progres" for the purchase of 80 mm S-8 unguided aircraft missiles. The contract was cancelled due to force majeure - heavy rain at the plant.
Therefore, in order to avoid a repeat of the story with the Ukrainian plant that disrupted supplies, it would be worth diversifying risks.
Moreover, the company's offer was made not so long ago. Therefore, it would be worthwhile to conduct a proper check to avoid buying another "Lviv Arsenal" with a Bosnian "powder factory".
And the icing on the cake is that the DPA had contracts that could have been used for this money.
It's just that no budgetary commitments were made for them while the inspections were underway and the licence was being waited for.
In other words, the accusation that "no contracts were signed while Maryna was away on business trips" does work. The contracts were being worked on. Moreover, it is somewhat surprising that similar claims are not made against representatives of the SLO who were on the same business trip.
Therefore, this whole story leaves a very subjective impression that a lot of money should have been transferred to a specific structure, plus I really wanted to show the inefficiency of the DPA once again.
Now journalists will wait to see how the story ends. Unless, of course, all the sources are imprisoned under Bill 10242 or other articles.
And it will be very funny (in fact, it won't be) if the DPA now asks for the same billions for the contracts already signed.
Censor.NET has requested official comments from the Ministry of Defence, the State Border Guard Service and the DPA and will publish them as soon as they are received.
However, given the resonance of the topic, the editors decided to publish the material based on the available documentary evidence.
Following the publication of the article, PHU Lechmar addressed the editorial board, stating that it is a reputable supplier to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, but did not deny the cancellation of the contract with the DPA. At the same time, the company emphasises that the ammunition was still delivered to the military. The editorial board provides the company's response in full.
Tetiana Nikolaienko, Censor.NET
