Iryna Mudra may have initiated the dismissal of Ihor Ponochovnyi because he refused to take part in the scheme

Iryna Mudra may have initiated the dismissal of Ihor Ponochovnyi because he refused to take part in the scheme

New details have emerged in the case of a raider takeover of assets regarding possible pressure on officials of the Ministry of Justice. According to the investigation, former deputy head of the Office of the President Iryna Mudra, former lawmaker Maksym Mykytas, and Member of Parliament Vadym Stolar may have been involved in organizing the scheme.

This was reported by Bihus.info, citing investigative materials.

According to the investigation, the case’s figures may have used the Ministry of Justice’s capabilities not only to re-register and appropriate certain assets. One episode involved the removal of the head of the Ministry of Justice’s anti-raiding office, Ihor Ponochovnyi.

The investigation found that Ponochovnyi knew about forged documents used during the re-registration of assets and refused to participate in the scheme. Investigators believe Iryna Mudra understood that his stance could hinder the appropriation of the real estate objects.

After that, according to the investigation, Mudra initiated Ponochovnyi’s dismissal by reorganizing the anti-raiding office.

Journalists also draw attention to an episode involving Deputy Minister of Justice Olena Ferens. According to the investigation, she coordinated the work of that office and maintained friendly relations with Mudra.

According to the investigation, Maksym Mykytas and Iryna Mudra considered pressuring Ferens. She may have been threatened with dismissal or the spread of compromising information through controlled media if she delayed handling complaints about registrars’ actions.

Ultimately, the company that Mykytas and Stolar were claiming was re-registered to Mykytas’s driver, Yehor Merkulov. This happened despite the fact that there were people in the Ministry of Justice who tried to resist the scheme.

According to Bihus.info journalists, these episodes indicate that the case’s figures used the Ministry of Justice’s mechanisms not only to seize specific assets. They also attempted to remove officials who refused to aid the scheme.