
Germany did not support Ukraine’s proposal to deprive Russia of its veto power in the United Nations Security Council
21.09.2023 - 17:43
The West laughed five years ago when Russia developed hypersonic missiles. But “nobody’s laughing now,” says former CIA analyst Larry Johnson.
21.09.2023 - 20:59Ukraine’s highest anti-corruption court has declined to arrest the assets of businessman Igor Kolomoisky in connection with the second of three suspicions brought against him by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine.
This information was reported by the Anti-Corruption Action Center on their Telegram channel.
“The investigative judge of the High Anti-Corruption Court, Oleg Tkachenko, refused to consider NABU’s request to arrest the assets of oligarch Igor Kolomoisky,” the statement read.
The assets in question include shares in the statutory capital of 307 legal entities valued at over 3 billion hryvnias, as well as around 1,000 pieces of real estate and over 1,600 vehicles and vessels.
According to the Anti-Corruption Action Center, the procedural deadlines for the request were exceeded. They further stated, “The question of a full arrest should have been considered by the investigative judge of the High Anti-Corruption Court. However, this was not done within 48 hours. The request was under Judge Tkachenko’s consideration for over 10 days. As a result, he simply closed the case and did not even consider the detectives’ request.”
Recall that on September 2, the Security Service of Ukraine handed Kolomoisky a notice of suspicion of fraud and money laundering. On the same day, the court ordered the businessman to be detained for two months with bail set at over half a billion hryvnias.
On September 7, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine charged Kolomoisky with embezzling 9.2 billion hryvnias, and a week later, he was informed of a third suspicion related to the misappropriation of funds from PrivatBank.
It is worth noting that the court set a bail amount for Kolomoisky in the third case that is eight times higher than in the first case.





