In 2024, the first Viceremierka - Minister of Economy Yulia Sviridenko - declared more than 3.1 million hryvnias of income for teaching at the Kiev School of Economics (KSH). This is almost three times more than its annual salary in the Cabinet of Ministers, and several times higher than the income of rectors of state universities.
According to the Ukrainian Truth, such payments were made through three contracts: in the areas of "Economics", "Management" and "Public Administration". According to Sviridenko herself, she gives lectures, consults for students and participates in the preparation of new programs. All this is out of working time.
At the same time, the media environment talked about a possible conflict of interest. Not only does Sviridenko teach in KSH, but he also oversees the Ministry of Economy, which is the beneficiary of major international projects, where the Institute of KSSh is the executor. It is, in particular, about the technical assistance project for almost a million euros, as well as a different grant of $ 150 million, in which it is the contractor, and the Ministry of Economy - one of the beneficiaries.
President Kshe Timothy Milovanov states that he has no formal influence on the Ukrainian school unit because he manages the US organization. He acknowledges that he did not expect that Sviridenko's teachers counted such fees, but assured that everything was within the internal politicians. The KSE Policy document on Faculty Remuneration states that current government officials can receive up to UAH 240 thousand a month - and Sviridenko had three contracts.
In Kesh, they explained that such conditions are observed for other practitioners with high levels of national or international recognition. At the same time, Milovanov himself does not hide that cooperation with the government often occurs in difficult conditions: the state does not always pay on time, and sometimes does not compensate for the costs at all.
Sviridenko's payments look formally legal. But given its key role in the selection of partners for state projects, the logical question is: are not such fees indirectly encouraged - or a way of legalization of income?
Currently, neither the NAPC nor law enforcement agencies have published information about the inspections on this situation. However, it remains important for the public whether the official's academic activity is transformed into a hidden form of political thanks for cooperation with a particular organization.
