Kurtiev, Pyshnyy, Shuster: who can enter the energy “reconstruction” and what Fire Energy has to do with it?

Victor Kurtiev, Maksym Pyshnyy, and Mikhail Shuster: three different careers and one nuclear energy market that could open up to private capital right now. Is there anything in common between an energy expert, a former manager of Energoatom with his own business, and a former head of the procurement department? And what do Fire Point and Denis Stiller-man have to do with it?

StopCor continues the topic started in the previous material about Viktor Kurtyev — the former deputy director of the Development Prospects Service of Ukrenergo, who in recent years has transformed from a defendant in a criminal case about document forgery into a media “energy expert,” and in the spring 2026 headed the company “Fire Energy” against the backdrop of public support for the defense firm Fire Point from the orbit of Denis Stiler-man.

One of the main open questions from the previous article is the fate of another criminal case (No. 52019000000000233), in which Kurtyev was involved. The editors sent an official inquiry to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine asking to clarify the circumstances of the closure of this case.

What exactly did the NABU respond?

In a letter signed by acting head of the Media Relations Department of NABU Anton Tatarnikov, the Bureau reports that detectives conducted a pre-trial investigation in criminal proceedings entered into the register 22.03.2019 of the year, on signs of offenses provided for in part 3 of Art. 362, part 2 Art. 364 and part 2 Art. 366 of the Criminal Code — i.e., official forgery, abuse of power or official position, and official forgery with serious consequences, committed by officials of the State Geocadaster.

Key theses of the response:

— no person within this case had been notified of suspicion;

— 23 September 2020 of the year the detective issued a decision to close the proceedings on the basis of paragraph 14 of part 1 of Art. 284 of the Code of Criminal Procedure — purely procedural grounds, which apply only when no one has been informed of suspicion, and by itself does not constitute admission or denial of guilt;

— this decision at the date of the response has not been canceled.

The Bureau refused to provide other information, citing Article 222 of the CPC on the inadmissibility of disclosing pre-trial investigation details, and explained the right to appeal the response to the court.

Who else is trying to enter the energy reconstruction? Maksym Pyshnyy: a state manager who became an “independent expert”.

Viktor Kurtyev is not the only one who lately combines the public status of an “independent energy expert” with probable private business interests precisely at the moment when the state opens the nuclear sector to private and foreign capital.

We are talking, in particular, about Draft Law No. 14164 “On Amendments to Some Legislative Acts of Ukraine Regarding the Principles of Introducing Small Modular Reactors (SMR),” which 22 of April 2026 year was recommended by the profile committee of the Verkhovna Rada to be adopted in the first reading. The document allows private ownership of fuel and SMR installations and excludes nuclear plants on small modular reactors from the procedure of separate approval by the Verkhovna Rada — i.e., removes parliamentary control where it was previously mandatory.

One of the most prominent public voices on this topic is Maksym Pyshnyy.

According to the Unified State Register of Declarations, in 2016–2018 years he held the position of head of Planning and Financing of the separated subdivision “AtomProject Engineering” of the State Enterprise Naek “Energoatom” — this subdivision oversees design and construction of atomic facilities, including the Centralized Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage. In other words, before becoming a public expert, Pyshnyy was part of the managerial vertical of the state nuclear operator.

11 November 2020 year — soon after the last known declaration on a public position — the public organization “Association of Nuclear Industry Specialists” (NGO “AFAP”) was registered in Kyiv. According to Opendatabot, its head is Pyshnyy Volodymyr Maksymovych, and Maksym Volodymyrovych Pyshnyy signs as a board member of the organization from 1 November 2020 year.

It is precisely on behalf of this association that Pyshnyy acts as a public commentator: he regularly speaks to specialized publications (for example, Dengi.Ua) on topics of small modular reactors and nuclear machine-building — often together with energy expert Olga Kosharnya, who publicly advocates the thesis that the development of SMR in Ukraine should proceed solely through private investment.

Meanwhile, according to YouControl, Maksym Pyshnyy is the director of LLC “Elektrika Ukraine” — a company that the analytical system links to the corporate group of Andriy Chabanenko, the Visotsky family group, and Concorde Capital’s Ihor Mazepa.

According to the online publication Energoreforma, “Elektrika Ukraine” features among the winners of a specialized auction by Ukrenergo for additional services — i.e., a private structure led by Pyshnyy conducts commercial operations directly with the state electricity operator, while he publicly advocates for liberalizing the adjacent nuclear segment. This is not proof of violation — there may be no conflict of interest in a formal-legal sense here — but it is a documented coincidence of roles of an “industry expert” and the owner of a commercial entity operating in the same market.

The publication Parliament.UA goes further and calls Pyshnyy (quoted) “a kind of shadow lobbyist,” linking him to a new energy business of the former head of Naftogaz, Andriy Kobolev — the company ENEY, which Kobolev founded together with former U.S. official Surya Jayanti precisely for small modular reactors and decarbonization.

Note that we did not uncover any direct corporate or financial link between Pyshnyy and ENEY or Kobolev, and Parliament.UA’s statements are purely the outlet’s hypotheses.

Nevertheless, the fact that Pyshnyy and Kosharnya regularly and synchronously promote in the media the same thesis — privatization of nuclear generation through SMR — exactly when this thesis is turning into a bill in the Verkhovna Rada and when Kobolev’s foreign business is investing in the same segment — may not be a mere coincidence, but at least a matter of public interest.

Direct corporate links between Pyshnyy and the companies “Fire Energy” or Fire Point were not recorded by the editors either — this is important to record separately so as not to blur two stories that intersect only thematically: both plots revolve around opening the Ukrainian energy market to private players amid postwar reconstruction.

Mikhail Shuster: Energoatom’s procurements against the backdrop of the “Midas” case.

The second person who draws attention in the management circle of Energoatom is Mikhail Shuster.

According to the Unified State Register of Declarations, in the declaration for 2019 year, submitted 27 in May 2020 year, he is listed as director of Procurement Management at NAEC Energoatom with an declared annual income of 857 thousand hryvnias. According to NAPK, the public procurement sphere is traditionally considered one of the most vulnerable to abuses.

It is notable that exactly the procurement and personnel contour of Energoatom found itself at the center of NABU’s loud “Midas” operation, which uncovered a shadow scheme of controlling the company through influence on personnel decisions and movement of financial flows in procurement.

Shuster himself does not appear in the materials of the Midas case.

It is noteworthy that Kurtyev and Shuster have previously been in the same public circle of experts who actively criticized processes within Energoatom. But the editors did not find a direct documented link between them.

What’s next?

As of today we have a documentarily confirmed fact: the case against Viktor Kurtyev, mentioned in NABU’s letter, was closed in September 2020 year on purely procedural grounds, without informing anyone of suspicion. In recent years Kurtyev has presented himself as an energy expert, voices support for Fire Point, and founded his own energy company “Fire Energy.”

We have a documented transition of Maksym Pyshnyy from an administrative position at Energoatom to the status of a public “independent expert,” who simultaneously runs a private energy company that works with Ukrenergo.

And we have the former director of procurement at Energoatom, Mikhail Shuster, whose career ran through one of the most risky links in the company ahead of loud corruption scandals in the sector.

This is currently three separate stories that intersect at one point — the rapid opening of Ukraine’s energy and nuclear sectors to private capital amid war and the Mindich-gate.

And if, hypothetically, these people truly plan to form one team, we might be talking not about a small LLC with authorized capital 100 thousand. We are probably looking at a serious attempt to enter the huge postwar generation market: distributed generation, energy infrastructure, private nuclear/SMR, engineering, and possibly technological synergies with the defense sector.

The StopCor editorial team will continue to closely monitor this topic and potential business alliances. More to come.