Procurement reform at Ukrainian Railways (Ukrzaliznytsia): how theSecurity “barrier” and SBU influence schemes were eliminated

Procurement reform at Ukrzaliznytsia: how the security barrier was eliminated and SBU influence schemes

Likunov explained that one of the first changes was the removal of the so-called security barrier—a mechanism that allowed the security service to block procurements.

According to him, previously the security service could effectively halt a procurement, notably by using an SBU letter about a possible “Russian trace” of one of the tender participants. Such a mechanism was uncovered during the investigation of a transformer procurement in 2022 year.

“Nowadays this is not the case, because security does not “approve procurements,” but provides professional cautions about the risks they have,” explained Likunov.

According to him, the security service lost the ability to independently decide whether a procurement would take place, and focused on risk assessment. Another step was a substantial reduction in the list of so-called railway-designated goods. For supplying such products, the company previously required additional documents that were difficult to obtain. Likunov claims that reviewing these requirements contributed to increased competition at auctions and lower procurement prices.

These changes became possible after an update to Ukrzaliznytsia’s procurement team, notably the arrival of Oleksandr Nakhoid, and with support from company leadership, including Oleksandr Pershchovskyi. At the same time, Likunov emphasized that the actual corruption back office was eliminated by NABU investigators, not the ministry or a new security team.

Speaking about Kubrakov’s motives, he suggested that the former minister sought to prevent the scheme from being restored after it was exposed. However, he cautioned that this is his own assumption. Before the arrival of the new team, Ukrzaliznytsia’s security department was headed by Eduard Kritsin — the former head of Artem Shil’s unit in the SBU. According to Likunov, Kritsin built his own vertical of influence within the company.

Answering the question whether the presidential office understood the scale of the back office’s activities and whether it influenced the decision to change the head of Ukrzaliznytsia’s security, Likunov noted that he found it difficult to assess.