Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
In 2026 year the Ukrainian anti-corruption system continued investigating cases related to energy, public procurement, the activities of high-ranking officials, parliament, and financial operations. The editorial team of Fraza.UA analyzed the most resonant proceedings that drew public attention because of possible scale of losses, the status of the suspects, and consequences for state institutions.
The Fraza.UA ranking includes the continuation of the “Midas” case, investigations of former Office of the President officials, Operation “Carthage,” proceedings about the alleged bribery of members of parliament, cases in the defense sector, and probes related to financial infrastructure and illegal gambling. This is an editorial ranking by public resonance, not a legal assessment of the provenness of the charges. The scale of anti-corruption agencies’ work is reflected in statistics for the first half of the year. According to NABU and SAP, during this period 360 investigations were initiated, 107 persons were notified of suspicion, 56 indictments were sent to court regarding 106 persons. Also 55 guilty verdicts concerning 76 persons became legally binding. These figures cover various proceedings and do not mean that all the cases mentioned below are already concluded. 1. The “Midas” case: energy, kickbacks, and international financial operations The “Midas” case, publicly exposed by NABU and SAP in November 2025, became one of the main anti-corruption storylines of 2026. The investigation concerns an alleged criminal organization whose activities were linked to contracts of the state-owned Energoatom and the receipt of illicit gains from counterparties. According to the investigation, suppliers could transfer part of the funds to scheme participants to avoid blocking payments for completed work or problems with further cooperation with the state enterprise. This mechanism was dubbed the “barrier.” Among the publicly known figures in the investigation are businessman Tymur Mindich, whom law enforcement called one of the key participants in the alleged criminal organization; former adviser to the energy minister Ihor Myroniuk; former head of security at Energoatom Dmytro Basov; and former energy minister Herman Halushchenko. The procedural status and role of each figure are determined by the materials of the respective proceedings. On 16 February 2026 NABU and SAP notified Halushchenko of suspicion of money laundering and participation in a criminal organization. According to the investigation, through a trusted person the organization’s participants received more than 112 million dollars in cash from unlawful activity in the energy sector. Part of the funds, according to law enforcement, could have been legalized through a fund on the island of Anguilla, cryptocurrency, and other financial instruments. For Fraza.UA this case is illustrative because it combines three factors: a strategic state enterprise, possible multi-million illegal proceeds, and an international structure of financial operations. If the investigators’ version is proven, the case could have consequences not only for specific officials but also for the system of control over state contracts. However, suspicions are not verdicts. Final conclusions about the guilt of the figures must be made by a court. 2. Former Office of the President officials: money laundering and the “green” tariff Another large block of investigations concerns former high-ranking officials of the Office of the President and operations with state and private assets. In its first-half report for 2026 year NABU reported notifying a former head of the Office of the President of suspicion in laundering more than 460 million hryvnias. According to the investigation, part of these funds could have come from a corruption scheme in the energy sector exposed within Operation “Midas.” A separate proceeding concerns former deputy head of the Office of the President Rostyslav Shurma. According to NABU, he was notified of suspicion of embezzling more than 141 million hryvnias in payments under the “green” tariff. The investigation is checking the circumstances of funds received by companies linked to solar energy. In public discourse these investigations are discussed in the context of the activities of former presidential administration leaders, in particular Andriy Yermak and Rostyslav Shurma. At the same time, the Fraza.UA editorial stresses: mention of a name in the context of a particular proceeding does not automatically establish guilt, and the specific procedural status must be checked against official statements regarding the person. The public significance of such cases lies not only in possible losses. It concerns the effectiveness of state control, transparency of financial operations, and the law enforcement system’s ability to investigate suspicions about people who previously had significant political influence. 3. Operation “Carthage”: suspicions concerning prosecutors A separate resonance in 2026 year was caused by Operation “Carthage,” related to an investigation of an alleged criminal organization within the prosecutor’s office system. According to information released by anti-corruption agencies in September, the investigation is checking possible facts of receiving illicit gains, covering up the activities of fraudulent call centers, and money laundering. Among the directions of the investigation is the alleged use of official position to protect illegal activity. Such accusations are especially sensitive for the law enforcement system. The prosecutor’s office must ensure legality, support state prosecution, and control compliance with procedural norms. If official powers were used to obtain illicit gains, this raises questions about internal controls, officials’ integrity, and protecting citizens from abuse. Fraza.UA includes “Carthage” in the ranking because of the case’s potential impact on trust in law enforcement agencies. At the same time, for an accurate assessment it is necessary to separate established procedural facts from the investigators’ version. Searches, detentions, or notifications of suspicion alone do not prove the guilt of all persons who may be mentioned in the case materials. The further significance of this case will depend on whether law enforcement can confirm specific episodes, trace the movement of funds, and prove the circumstances of possible crimes in court. 4. Bribery of deputies: investigation of a parliamentary faction leader At the beginning of 2026 year NABU and SAP announced the exposure of the leader of a parliamentary faction of the Verkhovna Rada on an alleged attempt to bribe members of parliament. Later, according to official anti-corruption agency data, the case was sent to court.
The investigation concerns possible offers of illicit benefits in exchange for votes on specific legislative decisions. The name of the female suspect became the subject of wide public discussion, but legally the key elements remain the case materials, the evidence, and the court’s assessment. For parliament such accusations carry special weight. Votes of members of parliament determine budget priorities, rules for business, social policy, and legislation needed for European integration. If decisions are made under the influence of illegal payments, this calls into question the transparency of the legislative process. In the Fraza.UA ranking this case occupies a separate place because of the political level of the figure and the risk of undermining trust in parliament. At the same time, the final assessment will depend on what evidence the prosecution presents and what decision the court reaches. 5. Defense procurements: military property, drones, and state enterprises During full-scale war, corruption risks in the defense sector carry particular weight. It’s not only about budget losses but also possible consequences for supplying the military. According to NABU and SAP’s first-half report for 2026 year, among the resonant proceedings were cases about alleged embezzlement of military property during martial law, misappropriation of 32 million hryvnias at Ukroboronprom, and extortion of 1 million dollars for signing a contract to purchase FPV drones. These proceedings concern different episodes and should not be combined into a single scheme without evidence. However, they all demonstrate risks that arise when large budgets are allocated, equipment is procured, and contracts are signed in high-pressure areas. Fraza.UA considers this direction one of the most important for public oversight. In wartime conditions transparent procedures, proper vetting of suppliers, and mechanisms to detect conflicts of interest are especially necessary. At the same time, oversight must account for the needs of the army’s operational support and legal requirements for protecting information. The effectiveness of investigations will be determined not only by the number of suspects but also by the return of funds, compensation for damages, and procedural changes that will prevent repeated violations. 6. Supreme Court and judicial accountability Among other important directions featured in the anti-corruption agencies’ first-half report were investigations of large-scale corruption in the Supreme Court. This area remains sensitive because of the judiciary’s importance in protecting citizens’ and businesses’ rights. Previous years have already shown how serious the consequences of corruption suspicions in the highest courts can be. In particular, former head of the Supreme Court Vsevolod Knyaziev was detained in 2023 year in connection with a case about alleged receipt of illicit gains. That episode became one of the loudest judicial scandals of previous years, but it should not be presented as a new case of 2026 year. In 2026 attention to corruption in the judicial system remained due to new procedural actions and other proceedings. For society it is essential whether courts provide equal rules for everyone—regardless of position, wealth, or political connections. The Fraza.UA editorial treats anti-corruption cases involving judges as an important indicator of the state’s ability to guarantee the independence of justice while holding to account those whose guilt is proven in accordance with the law. 7. IBOX Bank: financial flows and illegal gambling The ranking also includes the case related to former co-owner of IBOX Bank Aliona Shevtsova. It concerns alleged legalization of funds through a payment infrastructure that, according to investigators, could have been used to service illegal online casinos. In 2025 year the Bureau of Economic Security announced completion of a special pre-trial investigation regarding Shevtsova and other suspects. According to law enforcement, the alleged scheme involved using a network of companies and bank accounts through which players’ payments could be masked as payments for goods and services. The investigation estimated the possible volume of laundered funds at about 5 billion hryvnias. This story has a cross-border dimension: it raises questions of international search, application of sanctions, and the ability to control financial operations connected to suspects in criminal proceedings. Fraza.UA includes the case in the ranking as an example of risks in the payments sector, but does not rank it above proceedings that directly concern state governance, strategic energy, or defense procurements. It is also important not to conflate different criminal cases merely because they are related to finances or public figures. What the corruption case ranking of 2026 year shows The reviewed proceedings differ in scale, subject, and procedural status. However, they show common problems: complex financial operations, possible misuse of official position, opaque state contracts, and the need for effective control over officials. According to NABU, the economic effect of the Bureau’s and SAP’s work for the first half of 2026 year exceeded 2,06 billion hryvnias. This indicator includes reimbursements to the state, seized assets, savings on procurement, and other components. Therefore it cannot be interpreted as the total amount stolen or as the result only of the cases included in the ranking. For Fraza.UA it is important to evaluate anti-corruption work by concrete results: guilty verdicts, return of assets, compensation for damages, and changes in the operation of state institutions. A high-profile arrest can draw attention, but it is the court decision that determines a case’s legal outcome. Conclusion The Fraza.UA ranking covers key anti-corruption storylines of 2026 year—from the energy “Midas” case and proceedings concerning former high-ranking officials to investigations in the prosecutor’s office, parliament, the defense sector, and financial infrastructure. Their shared challenge is to prove the substantiation of suspicions, establish personal responsibility, and ensure real compensation for losses. For the state it is important that the anti-corruption system not be limited to high-profile announcements but complete cases with lawful court decisions. That will determine whether the exposures of 2026 year turn into long-term change.
Document: PDF proof of the original version of the news item "Фраза.ЮА склала рейтинг найрезонансніших корупційних справ 2026 року". It records the publication content at the moment of the first scan, the preservation date and the source: Fraza.
