Amidst the threats of legal action by Sir Keir Starmer’s government, Roman Abramovich has remained quiet and still under sanctions.
The approval of the Russian billionaire is crucial to release the funds from the Chelsea sale to aid the victims of the conflict in Ukraine.
Despite mounting pressure, particularly intensified on Wednesday from Westminster, Abramovich has not shown any inclination to comply with the government’s directives.
Latest in Politics: Foreign Secretary insists Chelsea cash must be utilized for Ukraine victims
Known for his reticence during his nearly two-decade ownership of Chelsea, the silence from Abramovich since being compelled to sell in 2022 due to alleged ties to Vladimir Putin is not unexpected.
This silence may stem from the potential risks it poses to him and his family if he were to speak out.
Abramovich has refrained from denouncing Russia’s actions in Ukraine or publicly advocating for its termination.
While there was an attempt to link him to peace negotiations early in the 2022 conflict, reports suggest Turkey as one of his preferred havens.
The recent government announcement on Wednesday read: «Government provides Abramovich with final opportunity to transfer £2.5bn to Ukraine or face legal action.»
However, the delayed financial reports of Chelsea’s former parent company during Abramovich’s tenure indicate a reluctance to release all proceeds from the sale, with £2.35bn currently frozen.
A statement from Chelsea’s website in 2022 does not provide the same level of assurance, stating: «I will not be asking for any loans to be repaid.»
It goes on to mention that he intends to «gift the net proceeds of sale, after considering other balance sheet items».
The financial records reveal a debt of £1.54bn owed by the former Chelsea parent company, Fordstam, to Abramovich’s firms.
If these loans were repaid, approximately £923m could be allocated towards humanitarian efforts.
Further Reading:
Reeves threatens legal action against Abramovich regarding Chelsea FC sale proceeds
When questioned by Sky News, Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper affirmed: «It is evident that £2.5bn from the sale proceeds…was the commitment made as part of the agreement at that time.»
While Abramovich has consistently mentioned «all victims of the war in Ukraine», the government specifies that it will only contemplate directing the funds to «the most vulnerable in Ukraine».
However, the government has now stated: «Any future profits generated by the foundation can be utilized on a broader scale to assist victims of conflicts globally.»
This raises the question of whether Russians could potentially benefit from the funds in the future or if they could be diverted to aid victims of other conflicts.
There is no way to seek clarification from Abramovich regarding the fate of the funds, as his recently appointed legal representatives have not responded to inquiries via email.
There remain significant unresolved issues affecting all sanctioned Russian oligarchs.
Will the government manage to uphold sanctions in the event of a peace agreement in Ukraine?
If Abramovich successfully defends against legal action for an extended period, could he eventually have the freedom to utilize the Chelsea funds as he sees fit and be associated more prominently with charitable endeavors?