Challenge

Vivacom, the former telecom monopolist in Bulgaria, sought Alber & Geiger’s help in tackling the Bulgarian Communications Regulation Commission’s (CRC) arbitrary and disproportionate mobile termination rates. Concurrently we were tasked with addressing the problem of illegal cables in Bulgaria, while the Commission’s position was that this issue ought to be handled solely at national level.

Strategy

The strategy adopted, demonstrated how broad ranging Treaty obligations should be translated into government actions. It had a strong EU public law and policy element, with consumer protection at the forefront. It helped Bulgaria understand and implement its EU law obligations. It enhanced the notions of fairness and proportionality in the civic realm. We used sophisticated fact-finding and law and economics analysis, to outline where subsidiarity pointed to, regarding the illegal cables.

Result

Vivacom has now been put in a position where it is better able to serve the public. Alber & Geiger’s lobbying activity resulted in the European Commission asking CRC not to discriminate when setting the level of termination rates between fixed and mobile networks. CRC significantly lowered Bulgaria’s termination rates to the benefit of consumers. Equally the EU Commission came on board with us to address the issue of illegal cables, exerting pressure on Bulgaria, demanding their immediate removal. A remarkable process of removals is now underway.

Challenge

The Maidan Square disaster on the eve of the Ukrainian Revolution and the following fall of Yanukovych’s government, triggered the Russian annexation of Crimea and a souring of the relationship between Russia and the West.

On March 5, 2014 the EU Council froze the assets of 18 former Ukrainian high-ranking officials, suspected of involvement in the Maidan Square disaster and misappropriation of state property. Among them Mykola Azarov, the former Prime Minister of Ukraine, and his son Oleksii Azarov, turned to Alber & Geiger for help.

Strategy

The strategy employed was built on an awareness of the full scope of the rule of law in Europe today, looking at the procedural fairness surrounding the sanctions. It required a subtle deployment of innovative legal arguments and emotional intelligence to navigate through the political turbulence, EU officials and peripheral actors to the institutions, for Alber & Geiger to demonstrate their innocence with strong convictions about their executive culpability.

We put forward that the freezing of funds was of a persecutive nature and not within EU competence. The three pronged approach attacked the premise of the sanctions at the right places and times. Alber & Geiger challenged the (1) legality, (2) legitimacy and (3) non-arbitrariness of the action, grasping all the potential playmakers.

Results

Ultimately the we were able to successfully get the freezing orders imposed on Oleksii Azarov removed, and considerably improve the position of Mykola Azarov. We made clear that the arbitrary targeting of individuals lacked a sufficient legal premise.

Through diligent fact finding we were able to cast doubt on the premise of the government’s alleged responsibility in the first place. We ultimately managed to help reinforce the rule of law, getting platform for the notions of fairness and equitable treatment of individuals into the public forum at a time when fairness was not an institutional priority.

Challenge

The Ukrainian company Milkiland had been ignored and effectively passed down with respect to a crucial development loan from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). Milkiland sought out help. The challenge was to overcome the network of interests that were blocking the EBRD from assessing the request of Milkiland on the face of it.

Strategy

The strategy was for us to simulate a check and balance mechanism in a more private context, within the nature of EBRD, being positioned in between the public and private domain. We co-ordinated the relevant playmakers and acquired a detailed awareness of EBRD’s internal politics. We delicately navigated the assortment of economic and political objectives and obligations.

We put forward that the behaviour of the EBRD was contrary to the purpose of the organization. By prejudicing the position of a Ukrainian company, it was acting against the stated objective of helping Ukraine become a stand-alone market economy.

Results

The result was a tremendous 30 million dollar loan for Milkiland. This achievement was the consequence of a careful triangulation of sensitive political and private interests. Legal and institutional certainty, and ethical business behaviour, are now a cause for enhanced development prospects in Ukraine.