Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
Ukrzaliznytsia evades questions: what is the company’s anti-corruption department hiding?
During our human rights work we received a response from JSC “#Укрзалізниця” to our complaint about abuses in the allocation of rolling stock by the Center for Transport Logistics branch (#ЦТЛ). 🤷♂️However, instead of thorough explanations about the use of state property, the company cites confidentiality of contractual information, protection of personal data, and the provisions of Art. 222 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.
📌 What exactly did we ask to be checked?
This concerns the circumstances of the allocation of grain cars by CTL, the fulfillment of long-term and monthly contracts, provision of cars beyond the volumes purchased at electronic auctions, and possible unequal access conditions to the state rolling stock for different market participants.
A separate episode concerns LLC “#Грейнсвард.” In 2025 the company received long-term rolling stock at rates of about 500 UAH per car per day, and later received additional lots for route transportation at significantly higher rates. At the same time, for certain monthly lots part of the agreed resource remained unused, yet this did not prevent further receipt of cars. We also raised the issue of the actual provision of cars beyond the volumes determined by auction results.
Is there anti-corruption control, but no full answer?
Ukrzaliznytsia reported that auction rules and trade data are available on the Prozorro.Sales platforms, and information about contracts is posted on the carrier’s profile website. ❗️At the same time, regarding the remaining requested information the company declared there are no legal grounds for its provision.
This raises a fundamental question for UZ’s anti-corruption unit: what specific control measures are being taken to check violations at CTL, were internal inspections and audits conducted, what violations may have been identified, and were sanctions applied to responsible persons?
📌A reference to confidentiality by itself does not provide the public with an answer about the effectiveness of control over state property. Therefore the role of the anti-corruption department and the responsible officials, in particular Volodymyr Svintsitskyi, requires separate attention within their powers and the measures actually taken.
By the way, cars are only part of the questions for Ukrzaliznytsia. We were interested in the presence of abuses in the allocation of grain cars, access of certain companies to rolling stock, and control over contract execution. A separate focus is Ukrzaliznytsia’s procurement, the cost of cars, equipment, and the efficiency of the state company’s use of funds.
Combined with questions about CTL’s allocation of grain cars, this raises a broader problem of the efficiency of resource management at the state company and the effectiveness of anti-corruption control.
We will continue to monitor the situation and demand appropriate responses to the circumstances set out in our appeals and clarification of what control measures were actually carried out. We will not allow socially important questions to remain unanswered with formal replies, nor will we let responsible officials rely on confidentiality references instead of a clear response to identified risks.
Materials on the topic:
▫️Shadow arrangements on the CTL grain car market: how “Grainsward” twists schemes with long contracts and Ukrzaliznytsia cars
▫️Ukrzaliznytsia’s reaction to the investigation: why officials protect Grainsward’s schemes and what Metinvest has to do with it
▫️Valeriy Tkachov from Ukrzaliznytsia called our investigation “ordered” and demands its removal because he is panic-stricken at the disclosure of the truth about the allocation of cars in favor of selected companies
▫️Tribis, Lemtrans and UZ’s privatized scarcity: how cars and locomotives were manipulated at the Zaporizhzhia directorate
#відповідь #тендери
TG|FB|YT|TT|INST|WB
Telegram publication
