The High Anti-Corruption Court on August 5 began hearings on the election of a measure of restraint for former Vice Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration, Olha Stefanishyna. The decision will be announced on August 6.
Suspilne was informed of this by the press service of the HACC.
NABU and SAP informed Stefanishyna of a new suspicion. At the beginning of the court hearing, her defense requested that the proceedings be held in camera.
The former official is not yet being informed of what exactly she is suspected of and what measure of restraint the prosecution is requesting.
On August 3, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy dismissed Olha Stefanishyna from the post of Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine to the United States.
UPDATED 15:30
Olha Stefanishyna commented on the accusations brought against her. She stated that she “calmly accepts” the procedural actions by NABU.
“I publicly and quite thoroughly commented on a significant portion of the issues appearing in the media, particularly regarding real estate, more than a year ago. Even after the first publications, I myself provided journalists with all the necessary documents regarding the apartment in question. I had nothing to hide then, and I have nothing to hide now,” said Olha Stefanishyna.
She also reported that she is in Ukraine.
UPDATED 16:40
At the court hearing, a prosecutor from the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office stated that Stefanishyna is suspected of illicit enrichment and false declarations. She made several expenditures for which she did not have the funds, according to her declaration.
Specifically, according to the investigation, in 2024–2025, she purchased two apartments in the “Faina Town” residential complex in Kyiv. Stefanishyna conducted negotiations for the transaction not personally, but through a close friend, and did not declare the purchased apartments. After the purchase, she renovated the apartment, the expenses for which were also not declared.
Furthermore, from January to April 2024, the former official rented another apartment in the center of Kyiv on Yaroslaviv Val Street for $1300 per month, and after that moved into her mother’s apartment in the “Lvivska Square” residential complex. However, according to the investigation, she did not indicate her residence in the declaration.
In addition, according to the prosecutor, Stefanishyna used a Mercedes-Benz car that was registered to her assistant, who also paid fines for it. According to the investigation, she did not declare this, nor the purchase of plane tickets and her mother’s medical treatment.
In the prosecutor’s opinion, Stefanishyna may abscond, influence witnesses, and obstruct the investigation. The prosecutor requests bail of over 13.1 million hryvnias.
UPDATED 18:15
After a break, the court session resumed. The prosecutor stated that the bail of 13 million 312 thousand hryvnias is justified by Stefanishyna’s potential to, among other things, finance the purchase of an apartment for $250-300 thousand and the value of assets she possesses. The prosecutor also notes that she has hidden assets.
The prosecutor also requests the court to impose obligations on Stefanishyna: to refrain from communicating with witnesses mentioned during the court hearing; to appear when summoned by NABU detectives; and to report any change of residence.
The defense states that the suspicion is unfounded and the bail amount is also not objective.
The defense insists that Olha Stefanishyna’s declared income amounts to 3.75 million UAH, and the bail amount cannot exceed 10.196 million UAH. The lawyer emphasizes that there is no evidence that Stefanishyna instructed her friend to buy the apartment, as the friend “had her own income exceeding 5 million over three years” – the lawyers did not specify the currency of the income. The lawyers also stressed that the intention to buy a house for $250,000 does not imply possession of this sum, as communications with the realtor mentioned “installment payments” and “discounts.”
The lawyer adds that the expenses for air tickets were work-related and covered by law, the apartment rental was carried out legally, and there is no evidence of residence in her parents’ apartment until December 2024. Regarding the use of the vehicle, the lawyer claims that correspondence and fines do not prove its use by Stefanishyna.
Source: suspilne.media