Andriy Yermak is in court. The defense says the investigation did not prove key charges — Babel is following the trial of the former head of OP

What is Andriy Yermak suspected of?

This was briefly explained by prosecutor Valentyna Hrebenyuk at a meeting on May 13. In 2020, Yermak agreed with businessman Tymur Mindich and Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov to build houses in the "Dynastia" cottage town in Kozyn. The construction was financed with money that (according to the investigation) was obtained through criminal means.

Most of the funding came from Tymur Mindichʼs group, which laundered money. The investigation is aware of the criminal origin of $500 000 that Oleksiy Chernyshov received on March 4, 2025 in Tymur Mindichʼs "back office".

Part of the funds that went to the construction were the share contributions of Hennadii Opalchuk and Lilia Lysenko. These are two co-owners of the construction customer, the Sunny Beach housing cooperative. They contributed UAH 15.6 million.

The investigation believes that they received this money for fictitious services to companies that appear in other proceedings. Opalchuk also deposited in cash into the accounts of “Sunny Beach” the money he received from the purchase and sale of various securities. For four transactions, his profit amounted to UAH 5.5 million.

The third way to finance the construction, according to the prosecutorʼs office, is Tymur Mindichʼs money. According to prosecutor Valentyna Hrebenyuk, $1.9 million was allocated for Yermak from the "laundry" (Tymur Mindichʼs "back office").

Prosecutor Valentyna Hrebenyuk asked to attach several materials to the case.

Among them is the protocol of the examination of the phone of Veronika Fedorivna Anikievych. This is the same Veronika, who is marked as "Veronika Feng-Shui Office" in Andriy Yermakʼs phone. Yermak discussed the appointment of officials with her, sending the candidatesʼ dates of birth. Veronika Anikievych used the seized phone only to communicate with Yermak, it had a chat with only him.

Valentyna Hrebenyuk quoted one conversation. On December 24, 2025, Andriy Yermak sent Anikievych a message: “Klymenko, Kryvonos” (meaning the heads of SAPO and NABU). On that day, NABU and SAPO searched Yermak’s driver, Vyacheslav Abramov.

In response to the message, Veronika began to instruct Yermak: to say that they were escalating the situation, and he was allowing it. She explained that Yermak had to react, and this would be self-defense.

“What has to happen for you to start acting?! And he [who is unclear] started acting. All his people were ʼeatenʼ, and he is silent! When they ʼeatʼ you, they will start ʼeatingʼ him.”

In response, Yermak wrote: “Fiala [apparently Tomash Fiala, a businessman and an owner of Ukrainska Pravda], Ukrainska Pravda, [Mykhailo] Tkach, [Sevgil] Musayeva, [Yaroslav] Zheleznyak, [Davyd] Arakhamia, [Oleksiy] Honcharenko. I am ready for anything.”

In addition, Anikievich advised him to go abroad. Further in the correspondence, she provides information about the close people of the head of NABU Semyon Kryvonos — relatives, compadres, their young children.

The prosecutor believes that this protocol proves that Yermak can put pressure on the heads of NABU and SAPO, and there is also a risk that Yermak can hide abroad.

What does the lawyer say in defense of Andriy Yermak?

The preventive measure should be less severe, because the prosecutor did not explain why a milder one could not be chosen. Prosecutors are asking for the harshest measure — detention on bail.

The prosecution really should have argued why other preventive measures were not appropriate, but it did not do so.

Bail of UAH 180 million is too much.

Andriy Yermakʼs declaration states that he has UAH 12 million, an apartment, and a 2019 Mercedes. The practice of ECHR says that bail is set precisely to ensure appearance, not as a punishment. Therefore, bail should be commensurate with the suspectʼs capabilities.

As Valentyna Hrebenyuk explained, UAH 180 million is the amount multiplied by 2 that was contributed to the construction of the R2 residence from the “laundry” (the “back office” of Tymur Mindich) and the co-owners of the “Sunny Beach” housing complex, Opalchuk and Lysenko. Why was it multiplied by 2? To eliminate the risk of hiding. She added that the court “has never chosen a preventive measure for a person who has influence over almost all top state officials even after his release”.

Legalization of property means that a person owns it — can use it, dispose of it. For this (according to the Civil Code), Andriy Yermak must have the right of ownership of the object — and he does not have this right.

The right of ownership of real estate, according to lawyer Ihor Fomin, arises only after the state registration of the object. This will happen only after the construction is completed and put into operation.

There is no registration for cooperative houses, there is only the owner of the land plot, and this is not Yermak. Therefore, there is no legalization of property.

In response, Valentyna Hrebenyuk said that Andriy Yermak is not accused of acquiring houses, but of building them using criminal funds.

Andriy Yermak is accused of having acquired property with money obtained through criminal means. But the suspicion does not say anything about the crimes that Yermak could have committed to obtain the money. Usually, such (predicate) crimes are obtaining an unlawful benefit, taking possession of property or funds.

During Babelʼs conversations with lawyers about the qualification of Article 209, which Andriy Yermak is accused of, lawyers always pay attention to the fact that it is fundamentally important for the case as a result of which crimes the funds were obtained.

The prosecution must prove that Andriy Yermak invested criminal money in the construction, and most importantly, he must have known that this money was obtained from criminal activities.

But the suspicion does not indicate how Andriy Yermak financed the construction. There is also no confirmation that he was aware of the criminal origin of the money.

The prosecution really didnʼt bring this up.

If Tymur Mindich created a "laundry room", what role does Yermak play in this "laundry room"?

"It turns out that Mindich washed and washed this money, did not wash it and then gave it to Yermak, who laundered it further," says lawyer Ihor Fomin. In addition, the suspicion says that Andriy Yermak helped Tymur Mindichʼs group to finance the construction. How exactly and when is not written in the suspicion. It is also unclear what relationship he has to the "barrier" scheme at “Energoatom”.

In response, Valentyna Hrebenyuk asked what Yermak had to do with SBU, the Prosecutor Generalʼs Office, and the Cabinet of Ministers. She added that the investigation has partial answers to this question, and during the investigation she will also find answers to the question of what relationship Andriy Yermak has to the “Energoatom” schemes.

According to the law, evidence includes things, documents, witness statements, and expert reports. So far, the case has been built on inspection reports — either of phones or computers obtained during the search and the National Security Investigations Unit. Many of the prosecutionʼs arguments are based on assumptions.

The more evidence there is to choose a preventive measure, the stronger the investigationʼs argument. But the law nowhere requires the investigation to present all the evidence to choose a preventive measure.

What evidence from the investigation did the defense not comment on?

Fomin did not comment on the fact that, according to the investigation, Andriy Yermak coordinated the design of the house and authorized his father to manage the construction.

For more news and in-depth stories from Ukraine, please follow us on X.