The Supreme Anti-Corruption Court of Ukraine, known by its Ukrainian acronym HACC, has faced scrutiny in recent weeks over asset seizure requests tied to prominent businessman Igor Kolomoisky. At the center of the discussion is whether NABU, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, correctly pursued measures to freeze or seize assets connected to the oligarch. In a statement reported via the Anti-Corruption Center on Telegram, observers were told that no asset seizure order had been issued against Kolomoisky to date. The report noted that the investigative judge responsible for the case, Oleg Tkachenko, chose not to accept the NABU petition to seize assets, effectively ending the immediate action on that petition. The source suggested that the petition may have fallen outside the procedural window allowed by law, leading the judge to close the case as a procedural matter. — Center Telegram
In mid-September, Ukrainian security services released a fresh set of allegations against Kolomoisky. Sergei Leshchenko, an advisor to the head of the presidential office, indicated that the entrepreneur was formally informed of suspicions related to forgery of documents and the seizure of property belonging to others, with the allegations emphasizing large-scale impact. The disclosure appeared to focus on the potential use of forged documentation to acquire assets that could be traced to illegal activity. This development adds a new layer of complexity to a long-running public discourse about Kolomoisky’s business network and its ties to national economic and political circles. — Center Telegram
At a later stage, reports indicated that Kolomoisky increased the bail figure for investigators to as much as 105 million dollars. The authorities also alleged that over a period spanning 2013 to 2020, the businessman allegedly moved more than 13 million dollars abroad. Observers have noted the tension between high-profile business interests and anticorruption enforcement in Ukraine, with critics asking whether asset freezes and bail adjustments reflect due process or strategic leverage in a high-stakes legal environment. — Center Telegram
Earlier analyses highlighted that Kolomoisky, previously among Ukraine’s most affluent individuals, had seen a shift in his economic standing during recent years. The evolving narrative around his case illustrates the broader struggle within Ukraine to balance competitive private enterprise with rigorous anti-corruption oversight. Analysts point to the ongoing legal proceedings as a test case for how Ukrainian courts and investigative bodies handle cases involving major figures who have been both influential in business and visible in public life. The unfolding events underscore the potential implications for investors, political dynamics, and the country’s efforts to bolster the integrity of its financial system. — Center Telegram