Court Reinstates Case Against NBU Chief Lawyer Oleksandr Zyma: Investigator’s Decision to Close It Deemed Premature

The court resumed the case against the NBU's chief legal officer Oleksandr Zym, and the investigator's decision to close the case was deemed premature.

The court reinstated the investigation into the case against the NBU's chief legal officer Oleksandr Zym.

The Pechersky District Court of Kyiv canceled the investigator's decision to close the criminal case against the director of the Legal Department of the National Bank of Ukraine Oleksandr Zym. The case materials were sent for further pretrial investigation.

The criminal proceedings were opened at the end of 2023 year under the statute on abuse of power or official misconduct. According to the investigation, Zym, who is also the head of the Administrative Council of the Deposit Guarantee Fund, influenced the court process by sending, on behalf of the NBU, a letter to the Fund with a 'recommendation' to withdraw the claims of the Concord bank against the regulator.

This concerns court proceedings related to fines totaling 63,5 million UAH.

The Fund carried out this recommendation, which, according to co-owner of the bank Olena Sosiedka, deprived shareholders of the opportunity to defend their rights in court. She and another co-founder were recognized as victims in this case.

Why the court canceled the case closing

The investigator closed the proceedings in July 2025 year, citing the absence of an offense.

The court found this decision unfounded and issued without a full examination of all circumstances of the case. Specifically:

- not all possible witnesses were questioned;

- no document retrieval was conducted at the NBU, including Zym's letter to the Fund;

- other important materials that could help assess the actions of the official were not collected.

The investigator himself did not appear at the court session.

The court ordered the police to resume the investigation in criminal case No. 62023100110000229.

Previously, both the Prosecutor's Office and the court repeatedly demanded intensification of the investigation. Experts have repeatedly pointed to signs of deliberate delaying of the process and the likelihood that the case could be 'let slip through the cracks'.