Monday24 March 2025
vesti.org.ua

The Grishko Botanical Garden has "classified" a controversial construction agreement for its territory: an exclusive document.

Why is the Grishko Botanical Garden refusing to disclose its contract with "KSM-Group"?
Ботсад им. Гришко "скрыл" противоречивый договор на застройку своей территории: эксклюзивный документ.

The management of the Grishko National Botanical Garden has officially acknowledged that a very "confidential" (spoiler alert – it really isn't) contract, which envisaged the development of protected lands in Kyiv, "did not materialize," and therefore is considered "not concluded."

However, despite the "non-conclusion" of the contract, the Botanical Garden refuses to provide journalists with a copy. They cite confidentiality and the volume of requested information as reasons for their refusal. Both reasons may raise doubts about the legality of such a denial.

It was the phrase "the contract did not materialize" that the management of the Grishko National Botanical Garden used in response to a request from the publication "Telegraph," denying the provision of an electronic copy of the contract between the Botanical Garden and the developer "KSM-Group."

At the same time, current legislation (specifically, the active Commercial and Civil Codes that regulate contract formation) does not contain the wording "did not materialize." This can be easily verified by searching the texts of both documents.

Moreover, it seems that the Botanical Garden's management used the term "the contract did not materialize" from the old version of Article 181 of the Commercial Code (effective at the time the contract was signed), which stated in part 8 that "if the parties did not reach an agreement on all essential terms of the commercial contract, such a contract is considered not concluded (that is, one that did not materialize)."

This implies that if the Botanical Garden insists on this wording for some reason, they must agree that the contract is considered "not concluded." But then a logical question arises: why hide the text of a "not concluded" contract from the public and journalists?

"It should be noted that the National Botanical Garden is obliged to maintain confidentiality regarding information that is restricted, particularly information related to the contract and the process of its execution," the management of the Grishko Botanical Garden attempts to convince.

In fact, there are many questions regarding the confidentiality of this agreement. Primarily because Article 7 of the Law of Ukraine "On Access to Public Information" states that "Information specified in the first and second parts of Article 13 of this Law cannot be classified as confidential." Furthermore, the second part of Article 13 stipulates that the authority (in this case, the Botanical Garden) is obliged to publish and provide information upon request that represents public interest. It is unnecessary to convince anyone that the agreement between the Botanical Garden and "KSM-Group" indeed represents significant public interest, as it involves a company that has repeatedly used similar contracts to effectively seize lands from scientific institutions and develop them for the benefit of the Kopystyr construction clan. Hundreds of publications on this topic speak for themselves.

Besides the reference to confidentiality, which, it seems, should not even exist in this case, another awkward reason for denying the provision of the contract text is allegedly due to the volume of requested information.

"We note that the information you requested in your letter No. 285 dated 28.01.2025 does not correspond to the volume of information provided by legal entities of public law — state budget institutions in accordance with the requirements of the Law of Ukraine "On Access to Public Information," the Botanical Garden writes in response to the editorial request.

However, none of the provisions of the Law "On Access to Public Information" mention a reason for denial such as "information does not correspond to the volume of information. It seems this is merely the initiative of the Botanical Garden's management.

Nevertheless, it appears that something is very wrong with the agreement between the management of the Botanical Garden and the notorious developer "KSM-Group," which was caught signing it by the State Audit Service. In the auditors' report, it is clearly referred to as "an investment agreement." In a comment from Bihus.info, the Deputy Director of the Botanical Garden, Mykola Shumyk, calls it a "letter of intent." Yet, in the response to "Telegraph's" request, it is referred to as a "general organizational agreement."

The essence of the contract is also unclear: auditors talk about illegal housing development outlined in the agreement text, while the Botanical Garden insists that they have no knowledge of such "nonsense." They claim it only concerns the reconstruction of existing auxiliary buildings. However, considering that the developer "KSM-Group" has been repeatedly caught in dealings involving lands of the National Academy of Sciences (of which the Grishko Botanical Garden is a part), there is more reason to trust the auditors.

In any case, the contract should have been terminated long ago. Statements from the Botanical Garden's management suggest that the termination process has allegedly been ongoing since last summer. For over a month, they have been awaiting confirmation of the contract termination from the head of the Kyiv Military Administration. Yet, since then, no reasonable information regarding the termination of the contract has been provided.

It seems that the scenario where the developer will appeal the termination of the agreement in court, as "Telegraph" predicted in its article "Why has crime infiltrated the botanical garden? New details of the scandal with "KSM-Group" and the lands of the NAS ", is becoming increasingly realistic. After all, "KSM-Group," backed by the Kopystyr family, is already suing the state and scientific institutions in numerous similar cases. Especially considering that the management of the Botanical Garden has acknowledged: "KSM-Group" has invested several million into the project.

"Telegraph" will closely monitor the developments surrounding the Grishko National Botanical Garden. Stay tuned.