Sytnyk Scared Again to Name Pysaruk in My Case, Says Bakhmatyuk 

As reported by Ukrainian News, Bakhmatyuk has commented on a statement made by Sytnyk in an interview to Dzerkalo Nedeli [Mirror of the Week] where he admits that the so-called Bakhmatyuk case is in fact not a case against Bahmatyuk, rather it is a case against an unnamed NBU official. The businessman believes that Sytnyk was forced to make that admission as news of the case spread in the West. He is reluctant, however, to name the prime suspect because if he did, he’d face some tough questions.  

We’ve been hearing for over a year now about a Bakhmatyuk case. Suffice it to say, NABU has no business investigating businessmen in the first place, it only has jurisdiction to go after corrupt officials at the very top of government. And I’m not one.  But this is very big anyway. It is for the first time that Sytnyk has summoned the courage to admit that ‘it is not appropriate to refer to the case as Bakhmatyuk’s case, this is a National Bank case’. But we are still waiting for the other shoe to drop. Sytnyk is afraid to reveal who the case is actually against and name the prime suspect.  And the prime suspect is the former acting governor of the NBU, Oleksandr Pysaruk.

Notably, no evidence of damage done or of Pysaruk’s criminal intent has been gathered in the case, while Pysaruk has won in court against NABU. How come then that neither Sytnyk nor his lapdog ‘experts’ never mention Pysaruk? This is easy to answer. Regardless of my attitude to him, after all while in office he was instrumental in destroying my bank, Pysaruk is a highly regarded banker with an international reputation. To top it all, he used to work for the IMF.

This is the punchline. Sytnyk is in a pickle. He wants to pressure Bakhmatyuk so bad but without Pysaruk in the case against him, he cannot do it. And if he continues throwing baseless accusations at Pysaruk, he’s bound to invite tough questions from the ambassadors of Western countries.    That’s why we keep hearing Sytnyk speak about some obscure case against God knows who from the NBU but it’s Bakhmatyuk who somehow ends up being the villain, says the businessman when commenting on Artem Sytnyk’s statement.

By way of a reminder, Oleksandr Pysaruk stated earlier that in this case NABU is violating the moral principle of refraining from throwing baseless accusations or suspicions of committing serious crimes at honest people who did not commit them, while deliberately dragging their feet on a case they should have closed a long time ago by admitting their mistake. The other suspect in the case, Oleg Bakhmatyuk, has stated that fourteen months into the case NABU has not summoned the courage to visit and to interview him.