To ensure the funds from the sale of Chelsea Football Club go to Ukraine, the UK government has threatened to prosecute former owner Roman Abramovich.
Since the sale, the £2.5 billion in revenues have frozen in a UK bank account; Mr Abramowicz was sanctioned following Russia’s complete invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
Although Mr Abramowicz has stated he wants it to go “all victims of the war in Ukraine,” the UK government wants the money for Ukrainian humanitarian help.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Foreign Secretary David Lammy declared in a joint statement: “While the door for negotiations will remain open, we are fully prepared to pursue this through the courts if required.”
They added: “After Russia’s illegal full-scale invasion, the government is resolved to see the revenues from the sale of Chelsea Football Club reach humanitarian causes in Ukraine.”
“We are greatly frustrated that it has not been possible to reach agreement on this with Mr Abramowicz so far”.
The UK government’s conflict with his lawyers drives the delay in fund release.
Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Mr Abramowicz, a Russian billionaire who gained his money in oil and gas, was given a special permit to sell Chelsea provided he could prove he would not benefit from the sale.
Though he has denied it, he is claimed to have close contacts to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Although under UK sanctions he cannot access the £2.5 billion sale proceeds, the money legally belongs to him.
He indicated that earnings from the sale of the club would be donated via a foundation “for the benefit of all victims of the war in Ukraine,” including those in Russia, when he declared his intention to sell the team.
The UK government has objected and maintained that the money should only be used for humanitarian projects inside Ukraine.
Last year, a House of Lords committee declared it “incomprehensible” that Mr Abramowicz’s vow to support Ukraine remained unmet and that the assets stayed frozen.
“This impasse reflects badly on both Mr Abramovich and the government, which ought to have pushed for a more binding commitment,” the paper stated.
