Or the father-in-law — the governor, or the son-in-law - the head of the area. The third it isn't given

Online: {{ reading || 0 }}Read:{{ views || 882 }}Comments:{{ comments || 1 }}    Rating:(531)         

At numerous requests of readers of our site which has taken part in discussion of a subject of repeated representation by Cabinet of Ministers of the son-in-law governor Garkusha to a position of the head of the Berezansky district state administration, we give opportunity to examine both with the first, and with the second coordination. Conclusions draw.

In a question of appointment of Andrey Shapovalov there is one more interesting aspect which won't mention in a note representation of the stately son-in-law to a position, during discussion. The matter is that the Law of Ukraine came into force "About the principles of prevention and corruption counteraction" on June 11, 2009. Article 6 in this Law is called "Restrictions concerning work of close persons". From contents of this article follows that civil servants can't have in direct submission or to be directly subordinated to relatives by it to persons. Moreover, if such situation arises, these persons in 15-dnevny time have to take measures for current situation elimination. And if in the specified time these circumstances aren't eliminated, the corresponding persons are subject to transfer to other position which excludes direct submission. In case of impossibility of the translation, the person who is in submission, is subject to dismissal from a post.

In other words, from the Law follows that Garkusha's son-in-law can be appointed to a position of the head of the district state administration in the Nikolaev area only in one case - if Garkusha stops being the governor.

It is difficult to assume that Yulia Vladimirovna, giving Shapovalov's candidate on the statement to the President, I didn't know about existence of this Law. And if knew - and still gave - that why? Really really there are certain secret arrangements between Garkusha and Tymoshenko of rather presidential election? And what have to be these arrangements that for the sake of them the Prime minister - the Minister went for direct violation of the anti-corruption Law?

However, remembering "nice affairs" Garkusha in election campaign of 2004, it is simple to assume about what there is a speech.


Комментариев: {{total}}