At a time when Ukraine continues to loudly declare its fight against corruption, one of the most high-profile suspicions of the year - against businessman Timur Mindich - is rapidly turning into a demonstration of how fragile institutions can be when they face a large array of data, political weight, and a weak legal construct, writes UNN.
For a week, the country lived on news about a "criminal organization," "hundreds of millions of dollars laundered," and a special operation that, according to anti-corruption activists, had been prepared for years. But when the text of the suspicion became publicly available, the reality turned out to be far less heroic and much more inconvenient.
The document, which was supposed to be a demonstrative blow to top-level corruption, instead stunned the legal community, and not only with geographical blunders like Geneva, "moved" to Austria. For lawyers, this detail became not an anecdote, but a symbol of the entire tone of the suspicion: inaccurate, contradictory, and strikingly negligent.
And it's not about the desire to protect Mindich at all. On the contrary, experts warn: with such materials, he will most likely avoid any punishment not because he is innocent, but because anti-corruption bodies are once again going into battle empty-handed. Apart from audio recordings, which are unlikely to withstand judicial scrutiny, the investigation seems to have nothing. And this, not the suspect, becomes the main problem.
"Legal nihilism": the reaction of the legal community
Lawyers who analyzed the suspicion use formulations rarely heard in the public sphere.
"Absolute legal nihilism," writes lawyer Yuriy Sukhov, adding that the document does not contain key elements of the crime. Other experts call the suspicion "a fantasy, free of any evidence," and note that the investigation has not shown any primary crime that would explain the origin of the "dirty money."
The problem that can collapse the case: it is unknown what exactly was stolen
The suspicion does not contain Article 191 - embezzlement of state funds. This means that the investigation at this stage cannot prove that even a dollar was stolen from state structures, including "Energoatom." The noise about "100 million" turned out to be an informational wave that is not enshrined in the text of the suspicion. Since it only mentions 311 million UAH or approximately 6 million dollars, the origin of which has not been established, but which the investigation proposes to consider "criminal."
Suspicion, compiled from overheard conversations
The key "evidence" is conversations recorded in an apartment in the center of Kyiv, which detectives called the "office of a criminal organization." According to critics, this looks more like the atmosphere of a detective novel than a real investigation.
"It's interesting, but according to the text of the suspicion, it's exclusively about some movement of funds, but the sources of these funds are not specified. Therefore, it's completely unclear what they will prove in court to this group without sources and without the funds themselves," analyzes lawyer Rostyslav Kravets.
And the businessman also left the country on the day the suspicion was being prepared, despite constant NABU surveillance. How he managed to do this is a question that is now discussed louder than the content of the criminal articles. The State Border Guard Service stated that NABU had not given any order to detain Mindich at the border.
Too small numbers for too big an explosion
Perhaps the most unpleasant conclusion for the authorities was made by journalist Vlad Sydorenko: President Zelenskyy's ironclad political vertical was shaken by a case involving 6 million dollars, with extremely vague grounds.
A case that could fall apart before trial
If NABU does not prove the source of the funds, the bureau may lose jurisdiction, and the case, which has already become a political earthquake, may disappear without reaching court or remain without a verdict - as has been happening for 10 years with the case of ex-MP Mykola Martynenko. 10 years ago, he was also accused of financial fraud at the same "Energoatom." This also indicates that ten years of anti-corruption efforts around "Energoatom" have not in any way stopped corruption schemes at the strategic state enterprise.
Today, experts agree on one thing: the suspicion against Mindich has become a marker of a systemic problem in the anti-corruption vertical. Cases that should strengthen public trust instead show cracks in the foundation.
And it is these cracks, not the "criminal organization" from the suspicion, that have become the main threat to the state, including in the international arena.
This vacuum of trust is already being used by international players who are promoting the idea of a "quick end to the war" through a political compromise with the Kremlin. Now that the Ukrainian government appears weakened, pressure is mounting. Zelenskyy is being demanded to dismiss his key person, including in international negotiations - Andriy Yermak.
Behind-the-scenes discussions in European capitals and overseas constantly return to the question: can President Zelenskyy afford to refuse if allies say: "it's time to sit down at the table," even if this table is set on someone else's terms?
Under the guise of "peaceful settlement," Kyiv is increasingly being pushed towards a formula that involves the actual loss of part of its territories and a sharp reduction in its army - conditions that will determine the country's security for decades.
In Western capitals, this is presented as a "rational compromise." In such an atmosphere, the fragile, legally dubious case against Mindich becomes not just an internal mistake. It turns into a tool - unwanted, but effective - in the hands of those who want to show the world: Ukraine is unstable, the government has faltered, and the moment for pressure has come.
For a country fighting for its very existence, this signal is no less dangerous than any military threat. Because when allies begin to doubt - the enemy, on the contrary, begins to act.