Criminal Liability Urged for State Company Board Members, Expert Argues

Flaws in State-Owned Enterprise Oversight Boards

According to ХВИЛЯ: Expert Oleg Popenko has highlighted systemic issues within the supervisory boards of Ukraine's state-owned companies, particularly the lack of personal accountability for their members. During a live broadcast on his YouTube channel, Popenko stressed that legislative changes are urgently needed to ensure proper oversight of these bodies.

Oleg Popenko drew a comparison between the National Commission for State Regulation of Energy and Public Utilities (NCRECP) and the supervisory boards of major state enterprises like Naftogaz and Energoatom. He argued that Ukraine currently operates under a vertical management scheme where no one is held responsible for failures in the energy sector. This critique comes at a time when governance reforms in Ukraine's strategic sectors are under intense international scrutiny.

The Myth of Board Independence

Popenko further emphasized that these supervisory boards are not independent, and that truly independent members cannot exist under the current structure. He contends that every board member should face criminal liability for their decisions. The expert added that each member must have a clear job description and be accountable for their performance.

“Only then will we see results,” he stated.

Additionally, Popenko noted that if board members wish to be considered independent, they should consider reducing their salaries to around $500 per month, aligning their compensation with other employees in the energy companies. However, if they choose to receive high salaries, they must be prepared to answer for their actions.

“A high salary demands high responsibility,” Oleg Popenko concluded.

These statements by Oleg Popenko underscore the persistent governance problems within Ukraine's state-owned enterprises, especially in the critical energy sector. With the country facing global challenges like the energy crisis, the issues of board effectiveness and accountability have become even more pressing. Potential legislative reforms could significantly impact how these oversight bodies function and the quality of management for state assets.