The State Property Fund of Ukraine (the Fund) protects in the Supreme Court the rights of a state to the buildings of the National Museum of History of Ukraine in the Second World War (the Memorial Complex “Motherland - Monument”)

According to some publications in the media, “the company fights in courts for the rights to privatize real estate of the National Memorial Complex “Motherland - Monument”. The Fund turns to the media to publish fact-based information on the matter.

The State Property Fund of Ukraine in September 2015 amended the lease contract, prohibiting the privatization of leased property of the National Museum of History of Ukraine in the Second World War. This clause, per current legislation and the decision of the Ministry of Culture, was spelled out in the lease agreement with a company that leased a part of premises in 2019.

Through the court, the tenant tried to invalidate this clause of the agreement on the prohibition of privatization. The Fund won the case in the appellate court, but the Supreme Court returned the case to the Northern Economic Court of Appeal for consideration.

This court opened the proceedings, but did not inform the Fund about it. The consideration of the case took place in one session and without notifying the State Property Fund about it.

The State Property Fund categorically disagrees with this court decision and has prepared a cassation appeal to the Supreme Court, where it will legally and within the framework of the current legislation defend its position.

The tenant’s ownership of the object has not been recognized by any court.The lease agreement covers two premises that are on the balance sheet of the National Museum of History of Ukraine in the Second World War. The main building of the museum, which is crowned with the “Motherland – Monument”, is not for lease.

Important information: even if the court decides to cancel the clause of the lease agreement on the prohibition of privatization, it will not take place, since the direct rule of the law “On Privatization of State and Communal Property” (Article 4) does not allow the privatization of such objects.