In Sevastopol, the Russians nationalized the property of businesses and individuals
In occupied Sevastopol, the Russian administration decided to carry out the so-called “nationalization” of the property of six companies and five individuals. The formal grounds for the seizure of property were accusations of “assisting the Armed Forces of Ukraine,” following pro-Ukrainian communities on social media, and having ties to Ukraine.
This involves the illegal seizure of factories, warehouse complexes, and real estate-related companies.
The decision by the Russian occupation administration provides for the transfer of property belonging to six companies and five individuals.
Claims of “anti-Russian activities,” as well as the owners’ ties to Ukraine, are being used as grounds for expropriation.
The practice of seizing so-called “abandoned” property has long been in use in the temporarily occupied territories of the Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson regions.
Now, the occupying authorities are using yet another mechanism—the seizure of private property under the pretext of combating alleged anti-Russian activities.
According to the data provided, the phrase “combating anti-Russian activities” is being used as a pretext for the forcible seizure of property belonging to Ukrainian owners.
Such decisions effectively pave the way for the further redistribution of private property in the temporarily occupied territories.
The use of such practices indicates a further expansion of the mechanisms through which the occupying administrations are attempting to establish control over private property.
The seizure of property in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine has no legal force under Ukrainian law.
This was reported by the Center for Countering Disinformation.
Earlier, the Russian-appointed occupation authorities in Sevastopol adopted a decision to nationalize the property of six legal entities and five individuals for allegedly “assisting” the Ukrainian army and intelligence services. This was announced by the city’s “governor,” Mikhail Razvozhayev. According to him, the activities of these individuals were analyzed by the local anti-terrorism commission.
