Valery Muminjanov, the deputy commander of the Leningrad Military District, found himself at the center of a bribery investigation and was detained in Voronezh. This development was reported by a major Russian news agency, which cited an anonymous source familiar with the case.
According to the source, Muminjanov was arrested in Voronezh as part of a broader probe into corruption within the defense sector. The inquiry alleges that while serving as head of the resource supply department at the Ministry of Defense, the senior officer facilitated the signing of contracts for the supply of uniforms valued at approximately 1.5 billion rubles. The contracts allegedly extended to military personnel stationed in the Northern Military District region, and investigators claim that Muminjanov received more than 20 million rubles in bribes in exchange for his help.
On September 2, the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation announced the opening of criminal proceedings against Muminjanov under the article concerning bribe-taking on a particularly large scale. The committee’s disclosures further indicated that Muminjanov and his relatives own real estate in Moscow and Voronezh with a combined market value exceeding 120 million rubles, a finding that underscores the perceived breadth of the alleged illicit activity and the potential for parallel financial wrongdoing.
The case also notes that previous witnesses have testified to the involvement of other individuals connected to municipal leadership in related bribery schemes. Among those named, the former mayor of Novy Urengoy has been mentioned in connection with accepted bribes, contributing to the evolving narrative of corruption across regional governance and defense supply chains.
Authorities have continued to gather evidence, interview witnesses, and conduct searches related to the contracts for military uniforms and other essential supplies. The investigation seeks to determine the extent of the facilitation provided by Muminjanov, the precise nature of the financial payments received, and whether additional actors within the defense ministry or regional administrations were complicit. As the case unfolds, observers note that the findings could have implications for procurement oversight, contract oversight practices, and the integrity of supply chains serving military units far from Moscow.