Закрытость АРМА: как Елена Дума лишила агентство возможности осуществлять общественный контроль.

The Asset Recovery and Management Agency (ARMA) has been operating for three months without a crucial public oversight tool regarding its activities. Experts suggest that this situation benefits the agency's head, Elena Duma, as the lack of control allows her to avoid public scrutiny of contentious issues, creating risks for transparency, reports UNN.

Details

Back in September, all members of the public council decided to resign from their positions due to systematic violations by ARMA's management of the law requiring public involvement in its activities. Council members stated that their appeals were regularly ignored and access to discussions on regulatory acts was blocked. This deprived the public of the ability to exercise real oversight over the management of seized assets.

Experts explain that following the cessation of the public council members' powers, the head of ARMA, as per a Cabinet resolution, was supposed to carry out the re-election or election of a new council.

Former members of the public council noted in comments to UNN that during Elena Duma's tenure, the agency consistently avoided collaboration with the public.

"Throughout our interactions with the head of ARMA, we observed her unwillingness to be accountable to the public. Consequently, all our requests were ignored or answered with responses that didn't address the essence of the inquiries," remarked former chairman of the public council at ARMA, Igor Chobityko.

Former secretary of the public council, Dmitry Gromakov, added that the absence of a public council allows for evasion of criticism and enables potential violations.

"Three months without a public council, where no one (including Elena Duma - ed.) points out her mistakes, likely indicates that she prefers to operate in a dark, opaque environment, so to speak, when no one is paying attention to potential violations that may arise. After all, what has transpired over these three months, the public will never know. Therefore, it is certainly always more convenient than managing a transparent project," he stated in his remarks.

The lack of transparency in ARMA's operations and the disregard for transparency principles raise doubts about the agency's ability to effectively manage seized assets. This is now a concern not only for the agency's leadership but also for the bodies responsible for overseeing its functions.

Additionally

Transparency International Ukraine noted that ARMA frequently exhibits "contradictory communication from the agency or its officials, combined with populism, violations of the presumption of innocence, and a lack of understanding of the competencies of state bodies."

The Asset Recovery and Management Agency declined to comment on Transparency International Ukraine's concerns regarding "contradictory communication" from its officials, instead highlighting its "achievements" in legislative development.

This is not the only criticism directed at ARMA due to populism. Previously, experts pointed out that the agency focuses more on politically resonant cases involving oligarchs rather than on the effective preservation and management of transferred assets. It is worth noting that Elena Duma has repeatedly emphasized in her public speeches among her "achievements" the transfer of assets from oligarchs Dmitry Firtash, Mikhail Fridman, and Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska to ARMA.