Did Mstyslav Banik benefit from Lexus while working at the Ministry of Digital Transformation

Mentions of Lexus online during civil service

In 2023–2024, when Mstyslav Banik headed the Directorate for the Development of E-Government at the Ministry of Digital Transformation of Ukraine, he published posts on his social media mentioning the Lexus car brand. The question now arises: did this official receive any material benefit from the brand and did he use his official status to promote the marque.

Restrictions for civil servants

Mstyslav Banik is a civil servant, so the restrictions established by the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption” apply to him. In particular, Article 25 of the law prohibits officials from engaging in other paid activities, with the exception of teaching, scientific, creative, medical practice, and refereeing in sports. Entrepreneurial activity is also prohibited.

If the public promotion of Lexus was done for money, a discount, free use of a car, fuel, or service, such activity may fall under the restrictions on other paid activities. At the same time, the mere mention of the brand on social media does not necessarily mean a violation of the law. A personal photo of one’s own car without a call to purchase the product, a promo code, or an agreement with a dealer is not necessarily advertising.

Distinguishing between personal experience and advertising

A different situation arises if there is an agreement with the company. A recommendation of a car dealership, a special mention of a dealer, or a barter for mentioning the brand may have the characteristics of advertising integration. The Law of Ukraine “On Advertising” defines advertising as information about a person or product that forms or maintains awareness and interest in them and is disseminated for payment or other reward.

Risks of receiving gifts and conflict of interest

Separately, the law “On Prevention of Corruption” establishes restrictions regarding gifts. If representatives of the brand provided the official with a car, a significant discount, or other benefit in connection with his official activities, the provisions of Article 23 of the law may apply. Gifts in connection with the exercise of official powers are prohibited for civil servants regardless of their value. Exceptions apply, in particular, to gifts that correspond to generally accepted notions of hospitality, but value limits are also established for them.

Article 22 of the law also prohibits using one’s official position and associated opportunities to obtain improper benefit for oneself or others. Therefore, it is important not only the fact of mentioning Lexus, but also the circumstances under which it occurred. In particular, whether Banik received any preferences from “Lexus-Ukraine,” whether there was an agreement between the parties to promote the brand, and whether his official connections were used for this purpose.

If the company that the official was advertising had contractual, subcontracting, or other relations with the Ministry of Digital Transformation, a question of conflict of interest may also arise. In such a case, the law provides for an obligation to report a potential or actual conflict of interest.

Liability for violations

Administrative liability is provided for violations of the established restrictions. In particular, Article 172-4 of the Code of Administrative Offences concerns violations of restrictions on concurrent activities, Article 172-5 — violations of the restrictions established by law regarding the receipt of gifts, and Article 172-7 — violations of requirements regarding the prevention and resolution of conflicts of interest.

In the presence of additional circumstances and proven intent, liability may also be criminal, in particular in cases of illegal enrichment or declaration of false information.

At the same time, without confirmation that Banik received money, gifts, discounts, or other benefits, the mere fact of publicly mentioning the car brand is not evidence of a violation of the law. Thus, the question to Mstyslav Banik remains simple: were the posts with Lexus his personal initiative, or did he receive certain preferences from the brand?