My name is Mohammad Zahoor. I am a British citizen, the owner of the "Istil" group of companies, and the former owner of the English-language newspaper "Kyiv Post" in Ukraine. My first investment in Ukraine was in the Odessa Seaport in 1993. Since then, my group of companies has invested more than $400 million in various sectors of the Ukrainian economy.
This is a continuation of my article, published on October 3, 2018, and subsequently widely reprinted.
Ukraine is striving to attract direct foreign investment, but the levels remain minimal. This is not only due to the war. Rampant corruption, issues within the judicial and law enforcement systems, raider seizures, lack of rule of law, absence of proper governance, a powerless government, and concentration of power in a few hands—these are numerous reasons that deter the flow of investments into Ukraine.
I owned "Kyiv Post" for nine years, aiming to convey to the public both the positive and negative aspects of doing business in Ukraine. I often emphasized all the pros and cons, allowing readers to decide for themselves whether to invest or not.
After selling "Kyiv Post" in April 2018, pressure on me resumed, but I did not change my commitment to objectivity. We focused on the challenges faced by foreign investors in Ukraine: corruption, raiding, unfair courts, prosecutors, police, tax authorities, criminals, etc.
In 2015, "Kyiv Post" supported Poroshenko at the beginning of his presidency, but we soon noticed that the fight against corruption was not being conducted properly. Problems grew, and we began criticizing Poroshenko and his team. In response, the SBU initiated a criminal case related to the illegal restoration of the facade of the "Leipzig" hotel, but after providing all the documents, the case was closed.
However, our troubles did not end. Next, we faced several raiders attack. Here is the chronology of events:
1. In July 2009, we purchased a complex of buildings on a plot of land at 24-A Sichovykh Striltsiv Street (formerly Artem Street) in Kyiv. The property was privately owned and was bought from a company that had paid the Ministry of Defense about a million dollars.
2. In September 2009, the Commercial Court of Kyiv recognized us as a bona fide purchaser. This decision was upheld by all subsequent instances, including the Supreme Court of Ukraine in December 2009.
We breathed a sigh of relief, believing that the decision of the country's highest court would stop the raiders once and for all, and they would no longer attack us.
3. In December 2010, the Kyiv City Council decided to sell us the land plot.
4. In February 2011, a purchase agreement for the land plot was signed.
5. In May 2017, we fully paid for the land and registered ownership of it.
However, our belief that the decision of the Supreme Court would put an end to raider attacks proved to be mistaken.
6. In December 2017, our rights to the land plot were challenged by the "Prombud-M" company with the participation of the Ministry of Defense.
7. In January 2018, we contested in court the agreement between the Ministry of Defense and "Prombud-M," under which they disposed of our land plot, which we own by right of ownership.
8. On May 3, 2018, the court ruled in our favor. This decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal on July 1, 2019.
9. On May 22, 2018, Judge Vladislav Demidov declared the Kyiv City Council's decision to sell us the land invalid.
10. On May 23, 2018, ironically or coincidentally, exactly one day after signing the ruling against us, Judge Demidov's judicial powers expired. However, this "farewell gift" from the judge to our opponents—the raiders—lasted less than nine months.
11. On February 4, 2019, the Court of Appeal upheld our complaint and overturned Judge Demidov's decision.
12. On April 24, 2019, the Supreme Court upheld the decision to recognize our ownership rights to the land plot.
After Poroshenko's fall and Zelensky's victory, I hoped that the bad days for Ukraine were over. But this did not happen. We again faced a raider attack on the same asset by officials from the Ministry of Defense.
13. In May 2023, my company was hinted at the existence of a criminal case and indirectly demanded money for its closure.
14. On July 10, 2024, armed military personnel from the Ministry of Defense seized our property complex in Kyiv. We found out that the basis for the seizure was a dubious ruling issued by the Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv in 2019. This ruling, which my company was unaware of until July 2024, ordered the "return of the property complex" to the Ministry of Defense's housing and operational management as material evidence in a 2009 case against a ministry official. However, this ruling did not apply to my company, the owner of the property complex, and we were not even a party to this case.
Serious questions arise regarding the fact that the Shevchenkivskyi District Court changed a decade-old ruling without notifying the legal owner of the property, whose ownership rights were confirmed by a Supreme Court decision.
Rhetorical questions arise:
Why were changes made to a 2009 case in 2019, when the statute of limitations had expired more than three times?
Why did this 2019 ruling surface five years after its issuance when the statute of limitations had expired?
Why was the property owner not notified, despite paying all property taxes and utility bills for years?
Why was the registrar of Yakushynets Village Council in Vinnytsia Oblast chosen to register the property, and not a registrar in Kyiv?
How could the registrar register ownership of the property when it was under Tax Authority arrest due to ongoing tax issues?
How could the registrar change the property's owner when it was mortgaged to a third party?
What were a dozen black SUVs with tinted windows doing at the site of the raider seizure?
Why was a notorious lawyer, who always represents the interests of the land mafia, present at the scene of the raider seizure?
The simplest answer is that it was a meticulously planned raider attack.
15. In July 2024, as another pressure tactic, the Ministry of Defense initiated a criminal case against us, allegedly for destroying the property complex, although its condition has not changed since the date of purchase.
My company has owned this complex for 15 years, repeatedly defended its rights in court, and paid taxes, but still ending up losing the property due to corrupt courts and officials.
During Poroshenko's time, foreign embassies, media, and their presence at court hearings helped our case. This time, publishing any article not favorable to the government leads to journalists being summoned to the Army Recruitment Centres, and the media is afraid to publish such content. I understand that under the current circumstances, the Ministry of Defense and the courts will never let me win. However, I will not give up. Even if I lose all the courts in this country, I will defend my rights in an international court and file a lawsuit against the state of Ukraine.
Before bringing our case to the public, I sent letters and press release to several key figures and organizations, including the President of Ukraine, UkrInvest, Transparency International, the Business Ombudsman, the American Chamber of Commerce (of which we are long-time members), the IMF, the EBRD, the Ministry of Justice, the Parliamentary Committee for Fighting Corruption, the Minister of Economy, the EU Embassy, as well as media outlets like New Time, KyivPost, Kyiv Independent, Ukrainskaya Pravda, Unian, Interfax, and others. Unfortunately, none of these recipients deemed my letter worthy of attention or publication, and did not even bother to reply. The only exception was the Office of the President, which responded that our letter did not meet their format requirements, without addressing the content. I have since reformatted the letter according to their specifications and am awaiting their further response.
I understand that Ukraine is currently at war with a cowardly enemy, and that the global community is united in support. Governments may be reluctant to highlight any negative news to avoid backlash from their taxpayers. However, this reluctance does nothing to address the serious issues faced by the foreign and local business communities at the hands of corrupt officials and raiders. The U.S., UK, and EU governments should apply pressure on Ukraine to put an end to such practices. However, the challenge remains—who can they turn to for rectification if even the Office of the President is implicated in these malpractices?
I hope that the diplomatic community, Ukraine's partner countries, business associations, and other agencies will read this article and use their influence to convince the Ukrainian authorities that the dissatisfaction of real investors, especially those who have invested over $400 million, indicates a failure in efforts to improve the investment climate in Ukraine.
I also appeal to my government, the United Kingdom, to strictly control how our taxpayers' money is used in Ukraine and to ensure it does not end up in the hands of corrupt officials.
Comments