Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
⚖️🧡🧡🧡🧡🧡🧡
Corruption official from the Ministry of Internal Affairs avoided responsibility — court closed the case due to expired time limits
Pechersky District Court of Kyiv closed proceedings in the case of an administrative offense related to corruption against Andriy Strokach — deputy head of the incoming correspondence registration division of the Documentation of Official Activity Department of the Document Flow and Control Department of the MIA apparatus.
A full review of Strokach’s declaration for 2024 year found that the official submitted false information amounting to 1,06 million hryvnias! This is qualified under part 4 of article 172-6 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses.
✔️ Undeclared: a plot of land of 1200 sq. m in Zazymka Village Council, Brovary district (cadastral number 3221282800:05:001:0057) valued at 150 thousand UAH at the time the right was acquired. The owner since 25 April 2018 is his wife. Strokach personally gave a notarized consent to the conclusion of the sale agreement on the same day. The court noted that this contradicts the claim of ignorance. Satellite images and subsequent use by the family confirm knowledge as of the end of 2024 year. An adjacent plot belonged to the official’s father and was later (in 2025) gifted to him together with a garden house.
✔️Not declared: Tesla Model Y (2022) worth 662 thousand UAH, ownership of which since 20 September 2024 belongs to his wife (the car was imported from abroad). The court noted that after NACP’s proposal, Strokach 4 February 2026 submitted an amended declaration in which the vehicle was already reflected. This, in the court’s view, confirms awareness of the family member’s property.
✔️Undeclared: balances on bank accounts as of 31 December 2024 totaling 248 thousand hryvnias
In court, Strokach did not admit guilt, claiming he had no intent and was kept unaware by his wife about her assets. The defense insisted on closing the case due to expired time limits.
Judge Oleh Solovyov found that the official’s actions contain the elements of an administrative offense — submission of knowingly false information totaling more than 1,06 million UAH. At the same time, the proceedings were closed under point 7 of part 1 of article 247 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses, because by the time of the case review the periods for imposing a sanction had expired.
The court set the date of detection of the offense as 23 January 2026 — the day the NACP completed the full review and drew up the report. The first summons for drawing up the protocol arrived only on 23 March 2026 (two months later), the protocol was drawn up later (around the end of May), and the materials arrived at the court on 4 June 2026 — almost half a year after detection. The delay by Strokach himself in appearing before the NACP (he was summoned five times) the court did not consider a reason to extend the period. Under article 38 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses, a sanction for a corruption offense may be imposed within six months from the date of detection, but no later than two years from the date of commission. These periods are final.
The prosecutor insisted on holding him accountable with a fine at the minimum range of the sanction, considering the date of detection to be the day the protocol was drawn up (then the period would have extended to November of 2026). The court rejected this position.
The ruling may be appealed to the Kyiv Court of Appeal within ten days. Earlier the court had ordered Strokach’s compulsory delivery, since he failed to appear at hearings several times.
💬 ABleaks_bot
💕 Join
Telegram publication
