Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
Political technologist Viktor Taran drew attention to Serhiy Bayrak’s role in the case of former State Property Fund head Dmytro Sennichenko. Meanwhile, journalists are examining the case materials and the circumstances of the alleged scheme, whose damages, according to the investigation’s version, are calculated in billions of hryvnias.
The post by political technologist and founder of the Eidos center Viktor Taran sparked a new discussion around the case of former head of the State Property Fund of Ukraine Dmytro Sennichenko. He drew attention not only to the actions of law enforcement, but also to the role of Serhiy Bayrak — one of the key figures in the story.
According to Taran, the public impression is that the investigation has a significant body of independent evidence. At the same time, in his view, part of the case materials are largely connected to testimony, correspondence, and audio recordings that involve Bayrak.
The political technologist also questioned how fully the public sees the context of the released audio recordings, and pointed to the circumstances under which Bayrak began cooperating with the investigation.
At the same time, these statements are the author’s assessment of the post and do not establish the facts of the case. The final assessment of the evidence must be given by a court.
Journalists from Censor.NET conducted a detailed investigation of the alleged fraud by former SPFU head Dmytro Sennichenko worth over 10 billion UAH and Serhiy Bayrak’s role in it, analyzing case materials and data from anti-corruption agencies.
According to NABU and the SAP, Sennichenko created a criminal organization that operated around state enterprises under the management of the State Property Fund. These include the Odesa Port Plant and the United Mining and Chemical Company.
The investigation alleges that Bayrak may have acted as an intermediary between Sennichenko and other participants in the scheme. In particular, he is credited with passing instructions from the former head of the SPFU to Andrii Hmyrin, as well as receiving and transferring funds.
As Censor.NET writes, according to the investigation, Bayrak and Hmyrin may have received 25% of the illicit proceeds each, while Sennichenko was allegedly assigned 50%.
One of the key episodes concerns the Odesa Port Plant.
The enterprise operated under a tolling scheme: a private company supplied gas, and OPZ processed it into ammonia and urea. The finished products were then sold on the market.
According to the investigation, Sennichenko and his associates may have arranged contracts on terms unfavorable to the state enterprise.
In February 2020 a competition was held to select a new partner for OPZ. One of the participants was Agro Gaz Trading. According to journalists, Ukrnaftoburinnia submitted a more favorable proposal then, but ultimately the contract was signed with Agro Gaz Trading.
According to the State Audit Service’s conclusion, from May 2020 to October 2021, as a result of the contracts signed, OPZ incurred losses of 308,3 million UAH. As Censor.NET notes, this conclusion was also confirmed by the Kyiv Research Institute of Forensic Examinations.
Another part of the case concerns the United Mining and Chemical Company, which was also under the SPFU’s management.
According to the investigation, in 2020–2021 years the company signed four contracts with the Czech firm BELANTO trade s.r.o. for the sale of ilmenite concentrate.
Law enforcement believes the products were sold at understated prices. As a result, the state may have received over 118 million UAH less.
According to information cited by Censor.NET, the concentrate may later have been resold to Russia and to the temporarily occupied territory of Crimea.
On 24 November 2023, NABU and the SAP updated the suspicion against Dmytro Sennichenko.
According to anti-corruption agencies, this concerns the legalization of over 10 billion UAH obtained as a result of the criminal organization’s activities.
In particular, the investigation is examining the sale of over 137 thousand tons of ammonia and over 1,14 million tons of urea for a total amount exceeding 10,6 billion UAH.
At the same time, the mere fact of being charged does not mean guilt has been proven. The guilt of the figures involved must be established by a court.
Bayrak’s role was precisely one of the topics Viktor Taran drew attention to.
According to the investigation, Bayrak was connected with Sennichenko even before the active phase of events around the state enterprises. Censor.NET journalists write that they knew each other back in their student years.
According to the materials analyzed by journalists, Bayrak was allegedly involved in finding people to implement the plan around OPZ and later kept in contact with other figures.
At the same time, Taran raises another question — how independent is the evidence obtained with Bayrak’s participation, and what procedural assessment should be given to his actions and contacts with other figures.
In particular, the political technologist points to information that Bayrak, according to him, may have sought contacts with officials and representatives of the Office of the President himself, and after that began cooperating with the investigation.
These circumstances require verification and assessment within the criminal proceedings and cannot by themselves indicate the unreliability of testimony.
At the same time, the Sennichenko case has another important aspect. StopCor has already conducted its own analytical investigation into other figures in the proceedings — Andrii Hmyrin and Volodymyr Kolot.
In March 2026 the editorial office published a material titled “700 million, a villa in France and a Dubai trace: new details of the Kolot and Hmyrin case.”
In it, journalists analyzed the business ties of the figures, their circles, assets and property issues that may be relevant to understanding the scale of the story around the State Property Fund.
The investigation paid particular attention to property and assets linked to the figures, including information about real estate abroad and Dubai-related connections.
The Sennichenko case covers not only the former head of the SPFU, but an entire network of officials, entrepreneurs and other persons whom the investigation links together.
For now, the final assessment of the evidence, Bayrak’s role and that of other figures, as well as questions of their guilt, remains with the court.
Recall that the StopCor team wrote about where the detained Galushchenko’s circle got millions for elite colleges and about billion-hryvnia tenders in Ukraine and record profits in Russia of the pharma giant Teva
Document: PDF proof of the original version of the news item "Ресторан ”Гірчиця” і план на мільярди: роль Сергія Байрака у справі ОПЗ та ОГХК". It records the publication content at the moment of the first scan, the preservation date and the source: NARDEP 24.
