The idea of "squeezing" at once two large private companies quickly loses supporters.
The arrest of corporate rights of two participants in the list of top 100 of the largest private companies of Ukraine was the moment of truth for the authorities and the media. The former managed to make anecdotal in their absurdity. Others were unable to notice whether to notice whether to make public.
On October 6, the SBU and the Office of the Prosecutor General (OGP) with reference to a court decision, adopted two days earlier, reported the arrest of "all corporate rights in Ukraine" belonging to the Sub -Russian entrepreneurs Mikhail Friedman, Petro Aena and Andriy Koshov. Since this court's decision has not been made public (and not yet made public, by the way), a number of Ukrainian media, citing their own sources, reported some details. In particular, it was said about the arrest of 100% of the shares of PJSC “Kyivstar” and Lifessel LLC, which are allegedly controlled by sub -persons through the Dutch company Veon Ltd.
In just ten days, the scandalous decision was significantly corrected. Referring to the request of OGP, the court corrected what is officially interpreted as a "description". Now we are talking about the seizure of significantly smaller parties of corporate rights, namely 47.85% of PJSC “Kyivstar” and 19.8% of Lifeselle LLC.
Unfortunately, even this surprisingly, the loud bell was not enough for the Ukrainian media, including business. Ignoring the well -known basic concepts of corporate legislation, journalists continue to reproduce the wrong narrative uncritically. "Only 47.85% of Kyivstar's authorized capital came under arrest, that is, a share that belongs to the Letterone structures ," the typical comments in connection with the latter in a court decision look like.
The unprofessionalism of civil servants is harmoniously combined with the unprofessionalism of journalists.
Let's remember the well -known facts shown in open sources. Kyivstar exists as a private joint -stock company . All 99,998% of its shares are the transnational company Veon Holdings BV, this company is registered in the Netherlands, and its shares are traded at NASDAQ (New York, USA) and Euronext (Amsterdam, Netherlands). The VEON shares are distributed between L1t VIP Holdings S.à RL, more known as Letterone, and Free Float, that is, stocks that rotate in the free market. To be accurate, Letterone belongs to 47.85% of voting shares, ie less than half. Most of the Letterone shares belong to three sub -persons.
Therefore, the first question that arises from an unbiased and educated observer is in what way it is possible to distinguish a part that belongs to sub -persons in a joint ownership ? The joint ownership is called common, that any of its share, though 100%, though half, though one and one action, belongs to all the shareholders of PJSC "Kyivstar" and Lifsell LLC without exception . In our case, this means that any package of shares of PJSC “Kyivstar”, which the Ukrainian state will impose its sanctions, owns only 47.85%. In the case of Lifsell LLC - by 19.8%.
In any case, the arrest of any share of the shares of the designated companies automatically affects the interests of all VEON shareholders. The Ukrainian state can impose sanctions either on all or no one.
The second question arises from the first. In what sense "does the arrest of corporate rights of Ukrainian companies do not affect the protection of the interests of foreign investors and owners of corporate rights, does not interfere with their economic activity and the possibility of dividends" ? This is how the state authorities explain the purpose of the arrest. But in the same official reports it is explicitly stated that "the arrest of this property will not allow the Russian owners to" rewrite "it on false persons in order to avoid further transfer of assets to Ukraine . What dividends of foreign investors can it be discussed in the case of "asset transfer to Ukraine" ? What are the interests?
Finally, it would be interesting and useful to find out the reasons why the first court decision in the case No. 761/35853/23, according to which 100% of corporate rights were arrested, still got into the Unified State Register of Judgments ? Second, there is a "description" in the register.
All these are extremely trivial questions that are both public and publicly asked by shareholders of these companies. And these are, by the way, such powerful investment funds as SHAH Capital, Lingotto Investment Management, Helicon Investments, City Group, BNP Parisbas Assets and others. Kaan Terzioglu, the Chief Executive Director of the VEON group, and Ogi Fabel, co -founder and Honorary Chairman of the VEON Board of Directors, spent almost a week in Ukraine. In addition to the large public activity program, they were actively meeting the door. The key question that representatives of the authorities hear - why do investors of the leading countries of the West should be collective responsibility for actions that have nothing to do with?
The chances of getting the answer look small. Judging by the sudden awareness of the investigation by the presence of "description", the idea of "squeezing" at once two large private companies quickly loses supporters.
What is happening around Kyivstar PJSC and Lifsell LLC, even in the best case, is not some "description", but an extremely unfortunate mistake. Ukraine does not come up with an attempt to confiscate these assets, instead, a loud scandal is guaranteed. Given the rapid increase in Ukraine's support problems in the US Congress, an extremely undesirable scenario will be a wave of letters from outraged VEON shareholders.
