The High Anti-Corruption Court acquitted Volodymyr Orlov, former first deputy head of the Dnipropetrovsk Regional Administration, in the case of alleged bribery incriminated by anti-corruption officials. The court concluded that the accusations were unfounded, which effectively cast doubt on the actions of NABU detectives and SAPO prosecutors in the high-profile case that lasted more than two years.
As Orlov stated in an interview, the most severe pressure, according to him, occurred during the pre-trial investigation stage. The investigation lasted from May 2024 and, according to the ex-official, despite the lack of convincing evidence, was purposefully brought to court. This was accompanied by psychological pressure and a huge bail of UAH 22 million, which was a blow not only to him but also to his family.
"Two points. First, an attempt to break me through a bail of 22 million hryvnias. This was a challenge not only to me but to my family. And second, the absolute impunity of provocateurs and the inability to appeal to law enforcement agencies. People with criminal pasts are put at the center of the case, and this is considered normal. Detectives, seeing that you can't fit a square peg in a round hole, still continue to do so," Orlov noted.
According to him, the detectives were primarily interested in his phone and contacts, not actual evidence. Orlov also publicly stated about a conversation with a NABU detective, during which, he claims, he was effectively offered "cooperation" in exchange for contacts needed by the investigation.
"I remember, after the pre-trial detention was chosen, I had a conversation with NABU detective Heiko. He clearly said: 'We don't have a task to put anyone in prison. We are interested in the contacts in your phone book. If you are ready to cooperate - you don't have much time. We need everyone except Serhiy Lysak.' This was a direct attempt to draw me into a game that is based not on justice, but on schemes. But I am a person who is not ready to trade principles or betray, even for my own salvation - especially when you don't feel guilty," Orlov said.
The case in court was supported by a group of SAPO prosecutors, which included the head of the anti-corruption prosecutor's office, Oleksandr Klymenko, personally. The investigation was conducted by NABU detectives under the leadership of its director, Semen Kryvonos.
The High Anti-Corruption Court's verdict became another example where judicial review overturned the results of a high-profile anti-corruption investigation. Against this background, discussions about the working methods of NABU and SAPO, as well as the limits of permissible pressure on suspects, intensified again.
According to media reports, the group of NABU detectives included Oleksiy Heiko, Viktoria Azaryan, Nesterenko, Andriy Denysiuk (resigned from NABU due to the drone procurement case within the "Army of Drones" project), Nazariy Kravchuk, Maryna Lobko, Volodymyr Vitkovskyi, Anton Prokopenko, Vasyl Buchynskyi, Serhiy Zhuvaka, Oleksandr Konovalchuk.
In addition to SAPO head Oleksandr Klymenko himself, the group of prosecutors included anti-corruption prosecutors Serhiy Savytskyi (known for stating in court in the "Midas" case about the alleged friendly relations between Mindych and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy), Ihor Tkach (prosecutor in the case of MP Anatoliy Hunko), as well as Olena Drobotova and Valentyna Hrebeniuk, whose relatives live in Russia.
This is not an isolated case recently: the HACC and its appellate chamber issued three acquittals in cases investigated by anti-corruption bodies in just one week.
This refers to the accusations against: former deputy of the Dnipro Regional State Administration Volodymyr Orlov, director of the Khotyn National Nature Park, and judge Tetiana Denysiuk, who was acquitted by the HACC appellate chamber.
Also, we remind that in September 2025, NABU closed the criminal proceedings against "Thermal Vision Technologies" (Archer brand), a manufacturer of thermal imaging sights for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, due to insufficient evidence of a crime. The case, initiated in 2023, concerned alleged embezzlement of funds (UAH 1.5 billion) and supply delays, which, as the company claimed, was unfounded, and searches paralyzed its work.