The Fund called the reason for the refusal to transfer money from the sale of Chelsea to Russia

Money from the sale of Chelsea will not be able to transfer to RUSSIA or Belarus due to sanctions, said Penrose, HEAD of the fund for the distribution of these funds. According to him, the government set the condition "geographical borders of Ukraine"

Funds from the sale of Chelsea, which should be sent to "all affected" by the conflict in Ukraine , cannot be transferred to Russia or Belarus due to sanctions, said the head of the fund that will distribute this money, former Unicef ​​UK chief executive Mike Penrose in his article for The Times.

According to him, the British government told the fund that, because of the agreement with the EU , money can only be disposed of if it is transferred within the "geographical borders of Ukraine." The Fund will not be able to consider requests for assistance to Ukrainians who are in other countries, Penrose explained. He noted that he advocated the allocation of money to "all victims" of the conflict and its consequences.

“With a huge amount of money like this – about £2.35bn, with millions more in interest accruing – the idea of ​​not helping the most vulnerable, wherever they live, is almost shameless,” Penrose wrote.

He added that by agreeing to these conditions, the foundation would not be able to comply with the generally accepted international humanitarian principles of neutrality, impartiality and independence, which London asks all non-profit organizations to observe.

As for the transfer of funds to Russia or Belarus, even if it were allowed to do so, the allocation of funds would be impossible due to sanctions, the head of the fund specified.

“We would not be able to allocate funds to Russia or Belarus, or institutions associated with their governments, or persons subject to sanctions , as this would violate the law on sanctions. I can assure you that neither I nor our respected government want to go to jail,” he writes.

Read PIONERPRODUKT .by The Bezos method: how Amazon makes decisions What surprises await investors when buying real estate in the UAE Parallel imports are legalized in Belarus: how it will help business Six elements that will kill your visual presentation

Penrose elaborated that in such a case, the government would have an observer in the fund, able to raise objections to any project that, in their opinion, may be contrary to the sanctions law. He explained that the fund was going to channel funds into legitimate humanitarian programs that are transparent and accountable and only provide assistance to civilians affected by this conflict.

“All we are asking the government is to provide us with funds without applying political conditions that would limit our ability to help all Ukrainians, communities and the people who host them, as well as the most vulnerable people directly affected by this conflict,” Penrose concluded. .

Abramovich decided to sell Chelsea, which he had owned since 2003, shortly after Russia launched a military operation in Ukraine, when he came under British and EU sanctions. The deal took place last May. After that, a fund was formed, headed by Penrose.

On June 18, the Daily Mail wrote that Abramovich was refusing to sign an order allowing him to transfer funds from the sale of the British football club to Ukraine. Foreign Office sources confirmed to the newspaper that Abramovich wants a significant portion of the money to go to Russians affected by the conflict. However, neither London nor the European Commission will agree to this while the sanctions are in place.

Prior to this, The Telegraph reported that the EU and the UK cannot agree on how best to spend these funds. According to the publication, the European Union insists that they go to work on the "long-term restoration" of Ukraine, while London believes that these funds should be sent to help those affected by the conflict.