On November 17, 2025, an investigating judge of the HACC heard the prosecutor’s arguments during the hearing on the interim measure for former Deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Chernyshov, who is accused of illicit enrichment and false asset declaration in the high-profile corruption case in the energy sector.

At the hearing, the prosecutor stated that members of the criminal organization laundered USD 1.2 million and EUR 96,000 and transferred these funds to Chernyshov.

According to the investigation, Chernyshov participated in several meetings of the so-called “intellectual club” organized by Oleksandr Tsukerman. In February 2025, Tsukerman instructed another suspect, Lesia Ustymenko, to prepare USD 300,000 for Chernyshov. That same day, the participants prepared USD 227,000 and EUR 96,000 in illicit funds for the former deputy prime minister, and Tsukerman personally handed the money to him.

In March, Tsukerman allegedly agreed with the leader of the criminal organization, Tymur Mindich, to transfer another USD 500,000 to Chernyshov, which he ultimately received from an unidentified person.

According to investigators, a month later, Tsukerman instructed that another USD 500,000 be transferred to Chernyshov. This time, they involved his wife, Svitlana, who had the codename “Professor” (editor’s note: Svitlana Chernyshova is a professor at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv). The money was handed over to her at Tsukerman’s medical center.

Chernyshov is also accused of false declaration, as he allegedly failed to disclose these funds in his asset declaration.

The prosecutor outlined significant risks to the criminal proceedings:

• Flight risk. Chernyshov traveled abroad more than 50 times during martial law and possesses substantial assets — between 2019–2025 he earned over UAH 69 million, his wife earned UAH 63 million, the family owns real estate, rents a house with land in Kozyn, and has a vehicle. Given the severity of the potential sentence, this creates a risk of absconding.

• Destruction of evidence. According to the prosecutor, Chernyshov deleted messages with his wife on the day the money was transferred.

• Influence on witnesses.

• Obstruction of criminal proceedings in any other way. This includes potential concealment methods such as using a private apartment, pseudonyms, and disguising meetings (for example, meeting near a car wash under the pretext of washing a vehicle or involving his wife to collect money under the pretext of visiting a beauty salon).

• Commission of new criminal offenses. To support this, the prosecutor read covert recordings capturing discussions between Chernyshov and Tsukerman about joint alleged criminal activity from which they “receive 2% profit”:

Chernyshov: “About that New Year thing — some dudes came up to our people, you know… like, offering their terms.”

Tsukerman: “Yeah. Pretty much the same terms as ours, plus that separate two-percent cut.”

Given these circumstances, the prosecutor requested detention with an alternative bail of UAH 55 million.

After the prosecutor’s statement, the defense filed a motion for temporary access to the examination report of Chernyshov’s phone, phone connection records, and the phone itself. The investigating judge left the motions without consideration but noted he would send a letter or inquiry to the NABU requesting non-confidential information. A motion to take Chernyshov into personal recognizance was also submitted during the hearing.