Bail procedure needs to be reformed. It must not be form of cashback from stolen assets, – NABU
In certain corruption cases, bail has ceased to be merely a precautionary measure and has become a tool of the criminal economy.
This was stated by Oleksandr Abakumov, head of the NABU detective unit, according to Censor.NET.
The role of bail
He explained that bail serves a very clear purpose in criminal proceedings.
"It is intended to ensure the suspect behaves appropriately and fulfils the procedural obligations imposed by the court. In cases handled by NABU and the SAPO, it is one of the most common alternatives to pre-trial detention. However, as practice shows, in some cases bail has ceased to be a preventive measure and has itself become part of the criminal economy," the detective emphasised.
The ‘Mindichgate’ example
"Tens and hundreds of millions of hryvnias are paid as bail for high-ranking officials from the accounts of companies that, on paper, have no connection whatsoever to these individuals. These are unknown firms with dubious business activities. Their founders and directors are often unable to explain either what their companies actually do, or why they suddenly decided to pay millions of hryvnias in bail for the suspects. They cannot, because behind the façade of these front men stand other people – the real beneficiaries of these companies. People who do not want their involvement to become public knowledge.
As we have seen, the mechanism is quite simple. The source of the funds is cash accumulated as a result of unlawful activities. For the suspect’s needs, it is effectively exchanged for non-cash funds that are already held in the companies’ accounts. After that, it is the company itself that formally acts as the guarantor and transfers the money to the relevant account," says Abakumov.
In the ‘Mindichgate’, the rates charged for such a service varied.
"We received reports of fees amounting to 10 per cent, 15 per cent and even 30 per cent of the bail sum. In other words, this is no longer simply a way of helping a specific suspect. It is also a rather lucrative business.
It would seem that this is precisely where financial monitoring should come into play, one of the key objectives of which is to combat the laundering of criminally obtained funds. But in practice, it works differently – the money is transferred, the bail is paid, and the suspects are released," noted the NABU.
Abakumov emphasised that the problem lies in the fact that accomplices to a crime can use funds of criminal origin without proper verification of their legality to secure the release from custody of another participant in the same criminal activity.
"And then, in effect, the bail becomes a payment for silence. It is the criminal underworld’s expenditure on preserving itself. Today, they posted bail and secured the release of a person who, according to the investigation, received millions of dollars in bribes. Tomorrow, they will help them breach the obligations imposed by the court, leave the country and live a better life somewhere abroad.
And the bail ends up being a cashback for the state. That is precisely why the rules for setting bail and the procedure for paying it require immediate legislative changes," added the detective.
Legislative solutions exist
"Draft law No. 15388, registered on 8 July 2026, could serve as a good basis for such changes. The state must scrutinise a company that has suddenly decided to post bail of tens of millions of hryvnias on behalf of a suspect.
Who is its real owner? Where did it get this money from? What is the relationship between the guarantor and the suspect? And most importantly – are these funds of lawful origin?
These questions must be answered before the money fulfils its purpose and the doors of the pre-trial detention centre swing open. Bail must remain an effective preventive measure, not a cashback scheme for stolen assets," concluded the head of the NABU detective unit.
