The state prosecutor’s office has asked for a seven-year prison term for Colonel Sergei Volkov, once the head of the Russian Guard Maritime Department, according to Irina Zhirnova, the press secretary for the Second Western District Military Court. Reports indicate that Volkov stands accused of supplying radar systems of substandard quality intended to secure the Crimean Bridge, as cited by TASS. This development marks a significant step in a case that centers on alleged misuse of authority and procurement irregularities tied to critical national infrastructure.
During the proceedings, the prosecutor’s office formally requested a seven-year custodial sentence for Volkov. In addition, the state attorney sought revocation of the defendant’s rank as a colonel and the stripping of state honors as a supplement to any potential punishment, Zhirnova stated. The demand reflects the gravity attributed to the alleged offenses and the intent of the prosecution to remove the individual from the military hierarchy and deprive him of public recognition if convicted. The court has yet to render its decision, and the defendant has not admitted guilt, maintaining his position of innocence as the case moves forward in the judicial process.
Earlier reporting noted that the Second Western District Military Court examined a criminal case alleging abuse of authority involving Colonel Sergei Volkov, who previously led the technical development and resource support department within the Russian Guard Maritime Directorate. The investigation revealed that in 2020 the Russian Guard moved to acquire two unmanned aerial vehicle systems to facilitate passage across the Kerch Strait, assigning the task to Volkov. It was observed that the civil servant initiated the procurement as the financial year neared its end, raising concerns that unused funds might be returned to the budget if the deal were not completed. The case underscores tensions between expedient spending at year-end and the meticulous oversight expected in large-scale defense procurement, a matter watched closely by defense analysts and reform-minded observers. The narrative surrounding this episode has been tracked by several news agencies and legal observers, who have noted the procedural steps and the interplay of accountability mechanisms within military procurement.
Across the broader context, Crimea has faced ongoing incidents and security discourse in recent years. There have been various statements and analyses about regional stability and the role of infrastructure projects in strategic calculations. While some commentators frame the events as isolated legal disputes, others stress the implications for governance, border security, and procurement integrity within national agencies. These discussions are informed by official court releases and investigative reporting from multiple outlets, with attribution to the agencies that first reported the core facts. The evolving case remains a touchpoint in debates about defense accountability, public sector governance, and the safeguards designed to protect critical assets.