"Newport case": an attempt to discredit the UAF
"Case Newport": an attempt to discredit the UAF
They are trying to discredit the Ukrainian Football Association with the so-called "Newport case", accusing them of the alleged misuse of funds in 2016 via offshore from the British Virgin Islands. At the same time, the documents published in this section eloquently prove that the case itself is fabricated and has an openly commissioned nature.
"Newport case": an attempt to discredit UAF
There are attempts to discredit the Ukrainian Association of Football with the so-called "Newport case", accusing it of the alleged misuse of funds in 2016 via offshore from the British Virgin Islands. At the same time, the documents published in this section eloquently prove that the case itself is fabricated and has an openly commissioned character.
"Inheritance" from the previous management
Since February 1994, the Ukrainian Football Association (then the Football Federation of Ukraine) cooperated with the company "Ukraine Football International" ("UFI", UFI). In March 2015, it became known that the company that fully owned all the commercial rights of UAF (FFU) belongs to a foreign company.
In addition, the FFU introduced a scheme for receiving funds from UEFA through the offshore company Newport Management. All funds - payments to clubs, national teams, financing of various programs - before reaching Ukraine, were transferred to the accounts of this offshore company.
After the election of Andriy Pavelek as the president of the UAF, this scheme was discontinued. The association sent two letters to UEFA with a request to make financial payments addressed to UAF directly, without the involvement of the intermediary Newport Management. One in March 2015, the other in 2016. The first letter was ignored, and only after the change of UEFA leadership was the UAF's request heeded.
"Inheritance" from the previous management
Since February 1994, the Ukrainian Association of Football (then the Football Federation of Ukraine) cooperated with the company "Ukraine Football International" ("UFI"). In March 2015, it became known that the company that fully owned all the commercial rights of the UAF (FFU) belongs to a foreign company.
In addition, the FFU introduced a scheme for receiving funds from UEFA through the offshore company Newport Management. All funds - payments to clubs, national teams, financing of various programs - before reaching Ukraine, were transferred to the accounts of this offshore company.
After Andrii Pavelko was elected to the post of UAF President, this scheme was discontinued. The association sent two letters to UEFA with a request to make financial payments addressed to UAF directly, without the involvement of the intermediary Newport Management. One in March 2015, the other in 2016. The first letter was ignored, and only after the change of UEFA leadership was the UAF's request heeded.
The Ukrainian Football Association (then - FFU) refused to cooperate with UFI and returned all commercial rights to its ownership.
At the same time, since March 2015, the management of the Ukrainian Football Association has never met or contacted representatives of the Newport Management company.
In turn, Newport Management ignores all UAF requests about the past use of funds received from UEFA.
Currently, the Ukrainian Football Association is the victim in the case and actively cooperates with the investigation.
The Ukrainian Association of Football (then - FFU) refused to cooperate with UFI and returned all commercial rights to its ownership.
At the same time, since March 2015, the management of the Ukrainian Association of Football has never met or contacted representatives of the Newport Management company.
In turn, Newport Management ignores all UAF requests about the past use of funds received from UEFA.
Currently, the Ukrainian Association of Football is the victim in the case and actively cooperates with the investigation.
Newport Management and the Surkis brothers
An internal investigation by the UAF found that there is every reason to believe that Newport Management is owned and controlled by the Surkis brothers.
This is confirmed by:
- the decision of the English court in the case of compensation for damages by Igor Surkis to the Pacific company;
- audit conclusions of Deloitte regarding the company "Dynamo" Kyiv (Cyprus);
- research of the well-known German publication DerSpiegel;
- by the decision of the Pechersk Court on a civil case regarding FC Dynamo Kyiv player Oleg Gusev.
Newport Management's accounts were managed by Mrs. Kiptenko (an employee of FC "Dynamo" Kyiv and a former personal assistant to the president of the club).
Directions to Newport Management were provided from an email address [email protected] (corporate mail of FC "Dynamo" Kyiv).
Newport Management and the Surkis brothers
An internal investigation by the UAF found that there is every reason to believe that Newport Management is owned and controlled by the Surkis brothers.
This is confirmed by:
the decision of the English court in the case of compensation for damages by Igor Surkis to the Pacific company;
audit conclusions of Deloitte regarding the company "Dynamo" Kyiv (Cyprus);
research of the well-known German publication DerSpiegel;
by the decision of the Pechersk Court on a civil case regarding FC "Dynamo" Kyiv player Oleg Gusiev.
Newport Management's accounts were managed by Ms. Kiptenko (an employee of FC "Dynamo" Kyiv and a former personal assistant to the president of the club).
Instructions to Newport Management were provided from the e-mail address [email protected] (the corporate mail of FC "Dynamo" Kyiv).
Case inconsistencies
Orders on the transfer of funds to foreign companies, drawn up allegedly by UAF officials, are forged:
- the payment order exists only in copies.
- this payment order has a number of technical errors (incorrectly specified details and position of Yuriy Zapisotskyi).
- on the days when the orders were supposedly signed, the Secretary General was abroad, so he could not physically sign the documents.
The most absurd thing is that the investigation itself notes that the orders were signed "by an unidentified person on behalf of the Secretary General».
Case inconsistencies
Orders on the transfer of funds to foreign companies, drawn up allegedly by UAF officials, are forged:
1. the payment order exists only in copies.
2. this payment order has a number of technical errors (incorrectly specified details and position of YuriyZapisotskyi).
3. on the days when the orders were supposedly signed, the General Secretary was abroad, so he could not physically sign the documents.
The most absurd thing is that the investigation itself notes that the orders were signed by "an unidentified person on behalf of the General Secretary".
The results of the "offshore war"
UAF (FFU) of 2015:
settlements with UEFA through Newport Management — offshore in the British Virgin Islands;
all commercial rights of Ukrainian football belong to the UFI company, which is owned by a foreign company;
the economic activity of the UAF (FFU) is controlled by a private (pocket) auditing company.
The results of the "offshore war"
UAF (FFU) of 2015:
settlements with UEFA through Newport Management — offshore in the British Virgin Islands;
all commercial rights of Ukrainian football belong to the UFI company, which is owned by a foreign company;
the economic activity of the UAF (FFU) is controlled by a private (pocket) auditing company.
UAF 2023:
settlements with UEFA directly, the funds go to the account of UAF;
all commercial rights of Ukrainian football belong to the Ukrainian Football Association;
the economic activity of the UAF is controlled by the world's leading auditing companies, which are among the top 5 in their activities;
The Ukrainian Football Association does not use funding from the state budget in its activities.
UAF 2023:
settlements with UEFA directly, the funds go to the account of UAF;
all commercial rights of Ukrainian football belong to the Ukrainian Association of Football;
the economic activity of the UAF is controlled by the world's leading auditing companies, which are among the top 5 in their activities;
The Ukrainian Association of Football does not use funding from the state budget in its activities.
