The order of exclusion of legal entities from the register of recipients of humanitarian aid is illegal – experts

Приказ об исключении юрлиц из реестра получателей гумпомощи является противоправным - эксперты

Experts have concluded that a Single legal aid service, order No. 3 of January 9, the Ministry of social policy about the exclusion of legal entities from the Unified register of recipients of humanitarian aid is unlawful and subject to cancellation. It seems that the order – raw and prepared in haste, according to the head of the Board NGO “Initiative E+” Valentyna Varava and head of the Unified legal aid service Dennis Osmolovsky in the article ZN.UA.

The authors point to the current resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 39, dated 30 January 2013 “On approval of the Procedure of registration of beneficiaries of humanitarian assistance,” p. 7 which defines an exhaustive list of grounds for exclusion from the Registry, namely: “documentary confirmation of the fact of violation by the recipient of humanitarian aid of legislation on humanitarian aid; the provision by the recipient of humanitarian assistance statements about exclusion from the Register; liquidation of the legal entity that is a recipient of humanitarian aid”. Where is the lack of report?

Also, according to Varavi and Osmolovsky, one gets the impression that the organization of the exception taken at random, because among them there are those who are responsible accountable. Thus, according to them, there are organizations that receive humanitarian aid, pass reports only to the tax – and remain in the registry.

“Where is the logic? In Mensie, who is obliged to provide us the report form and the reporting procedure is a mess, and blame organizations that have not filed monthly reports, forms and procedures that don’t exist? Don’t want to think that the emergence of this order caused by political necessity to report about the successes and punishment. Certainly among 79 organizations have and the sellers of humanitarian aid, and bogus, and unfair, but to row one size fits all, does not provide normative, obvious overkill. And experience shows that it is unfair to have the perfect, though “fake” accountability,” write the authors of the material.