ЕКСКЛЮЗИВThe Ministry of Defence refused to name the defendants in the Hrynkevych case among its officials

The Ministry of Defence of Ukraine, in response to a request from the Komersant ukrainskyi, refused to name the defendants in the proceedings on suspicion of Roman Hrynkevych among their own employees. The reason given was the secrecy of the investigation.

The Ministry of Defence stated that, in accordance with Article 222 of the CPC of Ukraine, information from the pre-trial investigation can be disclosed only with the permission of the investigator or prosecutor and to the extent they deem possible.

“Taking into account the above, as well as the fact that the requested information currently contains information about the circumstances of the criminal offences and is being investigated in criminal proceedings No. 620230000000000876 dated 12.10.2023, its disclosure may harm the pre-trial investigation. Thus, the provision of the requested documents is possible in accordance with the procedure provided for by the CPC of Ukraine only with the permission of the investigator or prosecutor and to the extent they deem possible,” the Ministry of Defence said.

The day before, the Office of the Prosecutor General, responding to a request from [Kommersant]media outlet, the Office of the Prosecutor General affirmatively reported that representatives of the Ministry of Defence had committed offences in the context of the case of Lviv businessman Roman Hrynkevych. This is a case of accusing the latter of supplying the Ministry of Defence with low-quality military uniforms.

In addition, as stated in one of the court rulings, the SBI investigation established close ties between Roman Hrynkevych and the Ministry of Defence.

At the same time, the MoD, the SBI, and the PGO are still silent about who it is.

The so-called “Hrynkevych case” Has been under investigation by the SBI for over 10 months.

The companies that manufactured the Armed Forces uniforms supplied by Hrynkevych’s company, which the investigation identifies as substandard, are not involved in the case either.

Earlier, a number of media outlets, citing the prosecutor’s statement in court, reported on the intentions of the Prosecutor General’s Office to serve notices of suspicion on officials of the Ministry of Defence in the Hrynkevych case.

The Hrynkevych case

Ihor Hrynkevych is accused of allegedly attempting to bribe one of the heads of the SBI’s Main Investigation Department. He allegedly offered USD 500,000 for assistance in returning seized property (uniforms for the Armed Forces), which the SBI had been holding at customs for several months.

Ihor’s son, Roman Hrynkevych , was suspected in the case of contracts with the Ministry of Defence to provide the Armed Forces with uniforms. At first , he was accused of allegedly embezzling public funds, and then the qualification was changed to complaints about the quality of the uniforms supplied.

The Ministry of Defence cancelled contracts with Hrynkevych’s company amid the scandal. It is also known that the Ministry of Defence had no complaints about the goods supplied, and at the time of the contract execution, it had not drawn up any complaint reports.