The authors of the scandalous bill No. 5655 “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine on Reforming the Sphere of Urban Development” note that the new law will allow without corruption and automatically obtain a building permit. But no one guarantees that automatic permission will be legal.. About the manipulations of the new reform, thanks to which responsibility was transferred from corrupt officials to developers, writes Georgy Mogilny in an article for ZN. UA " Why in the battle for urban reform they became enemies of the village and the city?

To begin with, the author proposes to understand what proportion of construction projects is in the zone of corruption risk when obtaining the right to build, in order to understand the need for radical changes in the licensing procedure.

First, the lowest responsibility class CC1 accounts for 90% of all construction projects.. Its beginning provides for complete deregulation since 2017 and requires only a message that after the launch in December 2020, the USESB should completely eliminate any corruption.

However, as already reported by ZN. UA, a function not provided for by law is programmed in the EGESB for officials to return messages for processing. That is, according to the current legislation, for such objects everything should already be automated, and the existing corruption is a consequence of digitalization.. To correct the violation, it is enough to stop violating the law and no legislative changes are required..

Secondly, DIAM issues 80% of all construction permits (part for the CC2 responsibility class and all for the highest CC3 class), which is 8% of all construction projects.. Both developers and officials praise DIAM, claiming that there is no corruption, and the application processing time is only one business day.

Thirdly, permits for only 2% of construction projects remain in the corruption risk group - for the medium liability class СС2 issued by the CHI.

"

At the same time, the author adds, the so-called automatic registration of the right to build in IP No. 5655 does not provide for a full-fledged verification of the legality of construction: the fact that officials are manually checking when issuing a permit will also be checked manually by experts hired by the developer.

Automatic blocking in the process of registration of the right occurs in the absence of the required package of documents, the maximum height of the building is exceeded and the status of a monument or construction in the buffer zone of a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

Violation of town-planning documentation or MDA (except for height) is not a basis for denial of automatic granting of the right to build.

The author is sure that the bill simply provides for the removal of responsibility for the illegal issuance of permits from officials and the transfer of responsibility to private companies. The reliability of checking the legality of construction from such "

“As in the paragraph above, local governments are losing the tools to stop construction in violation of the MD and MOE, and the new permit procedure does not guarantee their execution in the case of “automatic” registration of the right to build,” summarizes Mogilny.

[see_also ids\u003d"

On December 14, the Council, with a minimum number of votes - 228 out of the required 226, adopted the draft law as a whole, authored by the head of the Servant of the People party, Elena Shulyak. As ZN warned. UA, the vote passed without discussion. The mono-majority managed to push through the scandalous bill thanks to the deputies elected from the now banned pro-Russian Opposition Platform - During Life, in particular, Nestor Shufrich and Alexander Kachny. It should be noted that the petition on the website of the President’s office on vetoing the bill gained 25,000 signatures in just one day, which are necessary for Zelensky to consider it..

In turn, the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption stated that the Verkhovna Rada Committee did not fully adhere to the recommendations provided.. In particular, the NAPC emphasized that the law actually introduces “the principle of tacit consent regarding the restoration of the right to perform preparatory or construction work by the customer / general contractor in the event of, for example, intentional, for the purpose of obtaining illegal profits, failure to fulfill their duties by an authorized person of the town planning control body”. At the same time, the main drawback of the draft law in the NACP is the lack of openness in its development in violation of the principle of transparency and consideration of public opinion..