The Postal Square Case: How the Actions of First Deputy Prosecutor General Vdovychenko Played Into Kravets’ and Mamoyan’s Hands

The Postal Square Case: How the Actions of First Deputy Prosecutor General Vdovychenko Played Into Kravets’ and Mamoyan’s Hands

Ruslan Kravchenko submitted a resignation letter from the office of Prosecutor General. But he should not leave the Office of the Prosecutor General alone — with him must go the entire pro‑Russian and corrupt lobbying network, all those whom this system promoted, returned, and protected despite obvious conflicts of interest.

This was stated by Annabella Morina, co‑founder of the NGO 'GR “Pochaina”'.

It’s necessary to cleanse not only the top of the Office of the Prosecutor General but the entire prosecutorial vertical, starting from Kyiv, where criminal law for years has been used not to protect the state and community but to serve private interests.

In particular, Maria Vdovychenko, who today is the “first deputy Prosecutor General.” Kravchenko initially appointed her his deputy and later promoted her.

The sister’s brother, Oleksandr Levandovskyi, after the occupation of Crimea obtained a Russian passport, moved from Ukraine’s military prosecutor’s office to Russia’s military prosecutor’s office, and continued working there at least in the 2025 year.

Their father, Serhii Levandovskyi, has Russian citizenship and business in occupied Crimea, and his companies, according to the Center for Public Integrity (CPI), in 2024 paid at least 797 thousand rubles to the aggressor state’s budget.

Another brother, Volodymyr, had a Russian passport, and their half‑brother Stanislav Romenskyi has a Russian passport and taxpayer number. At the same time, Vdovychenko herself rented her half‑brother Romenskyi’s apartment in the elite Busov Hill residential complex (whose Facebook page still has a logo and description in Russian, thereby violating the Law 'On Ensuring the Functioning of the Ukrainian Language as the State Language' — KV), and also used her father’s house and car.

After the CPI’s statement, the Office of the Prosecutor General registered criminal proceedings regarding possible collaboration and state treason by Vdovychenko’s father and brother, but for some reason saw no grounds for an internal inquiry into Kravchenko’s first deputy.

Notably: the SBU reported that Vdovychenko’s security clearance questionnaire from 2019, which she filled out to obtain access to state secrets, was destroyed after the start of the full‑scale invasion. Therefore it is now “impossible to verify” whether she reported relatives with Russian passports and a brother in the Russian military prosecutor’s office.

However, Vdovychenko interested me in connection with criminal proceeding No. 12015100120001272 regarding the illegal construction of a shopping center at Postal Square.

In 2019 Vdovychenko headed Kyiv Local Prosecutor’s Office No. 7, which exercised procedural supervision in this case, and after that the case faded. That is, before Vdovychenko the investigation was proceeding effectively: the proceedings already contained expert conclusions from KNDISE that confirmed the illegality of the construction. By the way, later the Supreme Court used those same conclusions in case No. 826/16076/18, finally annulling the city planning conditions and restrictions for the construction of the mall.

Moreover, in early 2019 the Podil District Court, at the prosecutor’s suit, imposed a seizure on the illegal construction at Postal Square. At the same time, the prosecutor’s office filed a claim with the commercial court in case No. 910/2431/19 to return 6487 square meters of land at Postal Square to the territorial community of Kyiv.

But after Maria Vdovychenko headed Kyiv Local Prosecutor’s Office No. 7, the Postal Square case was wound down. On 4 March 2019 the Commercial Court left the claim without movement because the prosecutor’s office did not pay the required court fee (WTF?) and did not even justify the effectiveness of the chosen means of protection.

After that, at the request of Rustam Sutko (Mamoyan), the 53 volumes of the criminal proceeding on Postal Square were transferred from the Podil prosecutor’s office to the State Bureau of Investigations (DBR) by personal approval of Maria Vdovychenko. Although this is not within the DBR’s jurisdiction.

Why so? Likely because Rustam Sutko (Mamoyan) then worked in the General Prosecutor’s Office, controlled the DBR’s activities, and had a direct relation to Postal Square.

Rustam’s father, Cholo Mamoyan, through LLC 'Seilen Trade' owned the commercial premises of the 'Kompot' café, built on the square as the first launch complex of the multifunctional facility. His brother Suto Mamoyan, who later became a People’s Deputy from the [court‑banned pro‑Russian] OPZZh, personally introduced himself to me as the second investor of the shopping center. The formal and first investor of the underground mall was LLC 'Hensford‑Ukraine', the beneficiary of which is Andrii Kravets (head of DUS under Yanukovych).

Thanks to our appeals during the prosecutors’ attestation in 2019, Personnel Commission No. 1 of the General Prosecutor’s Office concluded that Rustam Sutko used his official powers in the interests of his family, after which he failed the attestation and was dismissed.

However, in 2020 the Kyiv District Administrative Court annulled the commission’s decision and the dismissal order, reinstating Rustam in the Office of the Prosecutor General from 24 December 2019 and awarding him reinstatement pay. Higher instances left the decision in force.

And, interestingly, again we have missing documents, as with Vdovychenko. When the court reviewed the legality of the personnel decision, it stated that the commission and the Office of the Prosecutor General did not support their conclusions with proper evidence and sufficient motivation. It turned out that the attestation materials, conducted by six personnel commissions, were destroyed back in December 2019, and now “the circumstances of this destruction are being investigated by the DBR.” That is the same DBR that Mamoyan controlled for years.

Mamoyan himself claimed that it was all slander and that there was no and never had been any criminal proceeding regarding Postal Square, and a representative of the Office of the Prosecutor General in court also said he knew nothing about it.

There was a case — and it disappeared. Like Vdovychenko’s questionnaire and Mamoyan’s re‑attestation.

After reinstatement Rustam Mamoyan worked as first deputy head of the Dnipro District Prosecutor’s Office of Kyiv, and now he 'heads in the Kyiv City Prosecutor’s Office' the Department of Procedural Supervision in criminal proceedings of investigators of the territorial administration of the DBR. So he again effectively controls the same direction he controlled in the General Prosecutor’s Office when he removed the Postal Square case materials.

Regarding the disappeared case.

Criminal proceeding No. 12015100120001272 was hidden and not investigated for almost four years, and resurfaced in Prosecutor’s Office No. 7 only after the start of Russia’s full‑scale war against Ukraine.

Moreover, on 17 July 2023 the Kyiv City Prosecutor’s Office publicly announced suspicions in this proceeding against former director of the municipal enterprise 'DBSHTS' Volodymyr Kyslytsyn and reported over 73 million hryvnias in damages. However, already on 25 August that episode was closed due to the suspect’s death.

And then something even more interesting happened. On 28 December 2023 the Podil District Court lifted the seizure on the construction at Postal Square, noting that over eight years of investigation no person, including officials of the municipal enterprise 'DBSHTS', had been served a suspicion. This was confirmed by a prosecutor present at the hearing, after which the construction’s seizure was removed.

In fact, according to my journalistic investigation, at the time the suspicion against Volodymyr Kyslytsyn was drawn up he was already deceased, and the prosecutor’s office could not have been unaware of this.

Today criminal proceeding No. 12015100120001272 is used as a dirty rag to sweep away traces: a corpse was given a suspicion, new ordered land‑use and city‑planning expert examinations appeared that are meant to annul the old ones. Therefore the Kyiv City Prosecutor’s Office, where Mamoyan again works, refuses to file a suit in the state’s interest to terminate an obviously illegal investment agreement regarding Postal Square, the existence of which has led to its emergency condition and could end in disaster at any moment.

On 13 May 2026 I set out all these facts in a statement to Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko. I named Maria Vdovychenko, Rustam Sutko (Mamoyan), Suto Mamoyan, their father Cholo Mamoyan, and senior officials of Kyiv City State Administration (KSCA); I provided dates, letter numbers, the criminal proceeding number, court cases, expert reports, and procedural decisions. I reported possible use of the criminal proceeding for private interests, five years of blocked investigation, a suspicion served to the deceased Kyslytsyn, and actions by prosecutors that resulted in the lifting of the construction’s seizure.

The Deputy Prosecutor General 21 May 2026 reported that he did not see factual data that could indicate specific criminal offenses by prosecutors’ employees. The information was not entered into the Unified Register of Pretrial Investigations (URPI), no internal inquiry was ordered, the circumstances of the suspicion against the deceased Kyslytsyn were not checked, and the roles of Maria Vdovychenko and Rustam Mamoyan were left unevaluated.

Instead of an investigation, the Office of the Prosecutor General transferred the materials to the Kyiv City Prosecutor’s Office, that is, precisely where one of the figures I named works. In turn, the Kyiv prosecutor’s office sent my statement to the Podil District Prosecutor’s Office, the KSCA, and even the Ministry of Culture.

The Podil prosecutor’s office replied with a couple of words. At the KSCA the statement was considered by orders of Valentyn Mondryivskyi, who was explicitly named in it among persons whose activities I demanded be checked. They involved the Department of Economics and Investments and the municipal enterprise 'DBSHTS' in processing, which are parties to the investment agreement and directly figure in the stated circumstances.

As a result, all potential suspects became acquainted with the contents of the materials that should have been the basis for a criminal investigation against them, laughed, and replied that they are not pretrial investigation bodies.

And I agree with them. They are not.

But when someone reports specific circumstances of possible crimes, names persons, documents, dates, and consequences, the information must be entered into the URPI and transferred to the proper pretrial investigation authority, not mailed to the case’s own figures.

What the Office of the Prosecutor General did under Kravchenko cannot be called ordinary inaction, because it is an active neutralization of a crime report.

Therefore I repeat. Ruslan Kravchenko should not leave alone. Along with him, Maria Vdovychenko, Rustam Mamoyan, and all who have turned the prosecutor’s office into a closed system of mutual cover‑ups must be removed from leadership positions.

I am fed up with the circular protection in law enforcement agencies that uses criminal law against inconvenient people and in favor of its own.

And perhaps — of its own across the Russian border.