Prosecutor in trenches
His name is well known in law enforcement circles from high-profile cases of the Maidan, the "diamond prosecutors," the Kaharlyk rape case, and the first conviction of the "wassailer" judge Ihor Zvarych. Prosecutor Yanis Simonov, head of a department at the Office of the Prosecutor General, has marked 20 years of service in the prosecution system, rising to the rank of senior justice adviser and surviving more than one assassination attempt. At the outset of the full-scale invasion, despite having a military exemption, he joined the Territorial Defense Forces.
Who would have thought that a prosecutor and former defendants could end up in the same boat, something one might imagine only in a movie, yet it happens in war.
In 2022, he defended Kyiv region and later Bakhmut, where he was wounded several times in battle. At war, he repeatedly fought alongside former convicts who could hardly believe that a real prosecutor was fighting next to them.
Today, Yanis Simonov commands a unit within the 412th Separate Unmanned Systems Regiment and has a clear vision of the role of military prosecution.
The 412th Separate Unmanned Systems Regiment NEMESIS is expanding, and one can join directly without going through a TCR and SS (Territorial Centre of Recruitment and Social Support), under the 18–24 "Drones" program. Both civilians and servicemen transferring from other units can apply by filling out a short form on the website, after which recruiters will contact them within 24 hours.
In the morning I found out at 6am that a full-scale invasion had begun.
On the 24th, the Prosecutor General's Office had evacuation plans in place, including the cases that needed to be done or the destruction of secret materials that had been obtained as a result of covert investigative search operations.
What kind of documents were these?
Given that I was involved in a large number of criminal cases related to the Maidan and high-ranking officials, unfortunately, some documents were destroyed. These were primarily corruption cases in which I was directly involved, both in the investigation and in forwarding indictments to the General Inspectorate and the Prosecutor General’s Office against those prosecutors, the so-called "diamond case," the "diamond prosecutors," you may recall.
Who exactly destroyed them, and where?
The prosecutor is directly responsible for classified materials.
He collects them, and he bears responsibility for them. I can speak for those materials that were directly under my authority and kept in the classified departments of the Prosecutor’s Office. At that time, I remember there was an order to destroy classified materials that could fall into enemy hands, those that had not yet been declassified. These included documents marked both "Top Secret" and "Secret."
As far as I know, some documents were destroyed in other agencies as well, specifically by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) in relation to criminal proceedings, and by the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) in relation to the Maidan cases, because certain materials still remained stored in the classified department of the Prosecutor’s Office.
To my recollection, it was directly on the premises of the "Arsenal" factory, where the Prosecutor’s Office had offices, that this was carried out on orders, executed by staff of the classified department, the so-called "classified office."
The documents destroyed concerned individuals connected with the FSB, as well as those related to the Maidan events during the protest actions, specifically materials with this so-called Russian content. The Maidan cases involved high-ranking officials: the Cabinet of Ministers, the Verkhovna Rada, the Prosecutor General’s Office, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and, in particular, classified materials of the police.
It seems that what was being destroyed was whatever could cause harm in the event of Ukraine’s occupation.
You know, there are different ways to look at this, and you could answer that question with another: why did the Russian army advance on Ukraine in exactly that way? They could have advanced differently, rather than rolling in in columns.
That means they believed they were being awaited here. Perhaps this is a question directly for the staff of the classified section who carried out the destruction. Perhaps someone took advantage of the moment.
For us, it was critically important to protect witnesses whose identities were classified, to keep their identities from being exposed, to shield them from outside pressure, to make sure no one knew who they were, and to eliminate any danger to their families.
In such cases, indeed, each prosecutor had to make decisions, because this is about people’s lives.
This is my inner conviction, and later it will be hard to claim I never said it. But I will say it.
Everyone pursued what was in their own interest. If it was deemed necessary to destroy that particular case file, it was destroyed deliberately, so that those documents would never become known to anyone again.
At that time, I decided I had to stay and help those who wanted to evacuate. I helped colleagues get out, loaded families into cars. There was, again, a wave of panic.
I’m from Kharkiv myself, born and educated there. My relatives lived there, and I decided I couldn’t leave them. I had to go fight.
I tried to make it to Kharkiv. I was turned back in Poltava; I understood active combat was already underway there. Over the phone I established that, for the time being, things were all right, and through friends and former classmates I tried to support them at least morally.
Who was your family in Kharkiv at that time?
My mother. She still doesn't know that I'm at war.
But she can see your interview.
She doesn't watch it.
Does she live in Kharkiv?
No, it was in May, after they had already withdrawn from Kyiv region, that I brought her back in May.
At that time, I was starting my work in the Prosecutor’s Office in the Obolonskyi district. And already then I had heard that there were enemy sabotage and reconnaissance groups in Obolon. I tried to get through to the draft office. They said there were too many people, no weapons available, leave your number and we’ll figure something out. Moreover, they told me: how can we mobilize you when you’re exempt? Prosecutors, of course, are automatically exempted if martial law is declared or in case of such extraordinary events.
The Pecherskyi draft office had exempted me at that time. And with that exemption, they said there was nothing they could do with me. If you want, go where there are weapons, maybe join some other Territorial Defense unit, and start there.
I called my friend Oleksandr, with whom I had worked on the so-called "diamond case."
And he told me that the 11th Company of the 204th Territorial Defense Battalion in the Holosiivskyi district was being formed. So I gathered my relatives and friends, within a week I had about 25 people with me.
Together with me, they began service on March 2. At that time, we were part of the 11th Company, which later, quite symbolically, became the 6th Company of the 204th Battalion, the unit I fought with for two years.
How much did they offer you at most?
Half a million dollars. That was in the Maidan cases.
But it's a huge temptation.
Look, when you’re fighting those kinds of crimes yourself, to succumb to that temptation, I didn’t need that money.
Ask yourself: if I had needed that money, would I have gone to fight?
I didn’t go through a military department, and I never did conscript service.
Could you shoot?
Given that my father is a serviceman, I can shoot accurately. I was listed as a designated marksman and they later wanted me to become a sniper. I understand weapons.
I served as a grenadier; I had an NLAW. I also knew how to use an RPG.
Now I can use many types of weapons. At that time, though, I had no formal military training. Sometime after the outbreak of the war in 2014, we in the Prosecutor’s Office were required to take refresher courses every six months. We had live-fire drills with pistols and assault rifles. And the main training took place in early March 2022.
We’re now in Vyshhorod, at the corner where the fighting flared up.
Our first engagement was on the night of March 7–8 at the junction leading to Pushcha-Vodytsia.
We ended up here after March 12. There was a direct order from the Ground Forces placing our company in their reserve, and we were attached to one of the battalions of the 72nd Brigade.
They were deployed a bit farther that way. We were brought in to hold the seam between the National Guard units and that battalion of the 72nd Brigade.
Here we prepared a separate machine-gun position.
See the church over there? The road runs off to the right behind it, and that’s where the 72nd Brigade was, one of their battalions.
At the time, as we learned, unfortunately there were heavy losses in the 72nd: an enemy element was moving in by vehicles and there was a fight.
Again, we supported them directly, both with our own weapons and by bringing up ammunition. Fortunately, we didn’t let the enemy push any farther. That element had about five or six BMDs, the amphibious kind and they had crossed on them. As far as I recall, judging by the bodies, they were paratroopers.
Given that we and the National Guard were here, we helped the 72nd and they beat back that attack. The task, again, was to prevent a breakthrough. We were the reserve at the time for the Ground Forces commander, Syrskyi.
If the guys hadn’t blown the dams on this river, the enemy would likely already have been in Obolon district and perhaps influencing the city center. Back then it was artillery duels.
The logistics of the columns that had pushed up to Bucha and Irpin were disrupted. And if that logistics chain hadn’t been disrupted, hate to put it this way, those enemy tanks might well have already been inside Kyiv. After that our artillery displaced, and we, staying there, took the brunt of the enemy’s return fire.
Because they were hunting for our positions to take out those artillery systems themselves. If you look at this gas station, there’s a large white tank, and a shell exploded right next to it, it caught fire. Our guys, fearless as they are, ran over and started putting it out.
These houses were where we rested and took cover whenever there was time for a breather. Our main force was farther toward Moshchun, roughly 5–6 kilometers from here. We spent two days on the line, one day here, rotating like that. There weren’t many of us.
We didn’t have the weapons for that. Even the RPGs and NLAWs couldn’t reach it. So we called in the boys from the 144th Air Defense Regiment. They came and supported us for three to four days.
The first time I ever handled a Stinger was here, I got it out in these fields.
It was this very Stinger launcher that we used to try to bring down a helicopter that was directly targeting our unit, popping up over the tree line and firing on our guys.
How long did you stay here?
We were here for exactly one month.
Officially, according to the documents that we in the battalion want to receive, from 16 March to 16 April we were here for sure. Someofficials did not know, perhaps they were deliberately doing so because it was war, perhaps someone did not know that such documents should be kept.
We had about 14 or 15 people in the company, and they had a law degree. Most of them were lawyers. And, as far as I understand, we also talked about the fact that if we could not get these documents, we would, of course, go to court to establish the fact that we really fought here.
They say there are no documents. Well, it's ridiculous when officials say that if there is no order, then you were not there. Well, I don't know, this is our reality.
How did you progress after that? Did you receive any offers?
I wasn’t looking for a path to move up as a manager, a commander, or an officer.
I saw myself as someone who could be useful, perhaps in certain combat roles.
In the summer of 2022 we completed cohesion, and our first temporary duty (TDY) was to Bakhmut. Back then Bakhmut was still far from the fighting; incoming fire was only reaching the Kurdiumivka–Klishchiivka area in that direction.
As it turned out, virtually all our TDYs were to Bakhmut. For whatever reason, first with the 204th Battalion and later, when I was in the 251st Battalion, it was Bakhmut, Bakhmut, Bakhmut, again and again.
Were you wounded in Bakhmut?
Several times, on several TDYs.
At first it was the defense of Bakhmut at the so-called fire station two kilometers north of the Artwinery plant. That’s a sparkling-wine plant, and we held the line near it because, if you look at the map, there are adits, tunnel galleries used for storage and the plant itself.
The fire station is two kilometers farther up on the map. Later, while we were holding there, the enemy was already in that tunnel. Our side, with the defenses not properly prepared, had moved a large amount of ammunition in there. The enemy also realized it offered cover and brought more in, and our guys were already observing it by drone. Then there was a massive explosion; some of our men were caught in it, and there were likely heavy enemy losses as well. They exploited the fact that there was so much ammo and blew it up.
That fire station belonged to the State Emergency Service (SES); it was likely abandoned. Even as we moved in, another brigade was alongside us. I won’t name its number, they didn’t act quite properly. They also pulled back, opening the right flank, which let the enemy push forward with tanks and try to eliminate us with fire. With a tank, you don’t hear the shot, you only hear it when it lands.
When it happened, thank God it hit only the fence. That was my first shrapnel wound and a concussion, and then we withdrew.
We were working alongside a tank brigade and an infantry brigade. Mechanized, to be exact. What surprised me when we arrived for rotation was that the guys had been there since November, we came in December, and the entire defense was being commanded by the Territorial Defense Forces.
It really surprised me. I won’t judge how others assess it, but the defense of that fire station was handled exclusively by the Territorial Defense Forces. And that fight, let me put it this way, wasn’t our first time ringing in the New Year in a trench. We got the tasking on the 30th, and our unit pushed out from the 31st through the 4th–5th. We were defending that fire station, the site itself, when the enemy closed in, remember, that was when Prigozhin claimed they would take Bakhmut. But around the teens of January they shifted everything to Soledar. That eased things for us because they redirected all their artillery there; thank God, we survived, and the shelling moved over. It’s not exactly right to say that, because our guys in Soledar paid the price for it.
At the time we were designated a fire support company, though we didn’t actually have any heavy weapons. The commanders were baffled: "You’re the fire support company, right?"
We said, "We just arrived; we haven’t even been issued weapons." After that we pushed out to the zero line. Reconnaissance was very difficult, it was literally New Year’s. No one really briefed us on the positions; no one even showed us around. We showed up to a waist-deep trench, nothing more.
I’ll say this: when I first went in, I grumbled, why is the trench so shallow; couldn’t they have dug more? But when we pulled out, I thanked the guys that there was at least that. Even as the withdrawal was underway, we evacuated the wounded, stayed put, and took out two enemy sabotage-recon groups. We’d only been issued four Degtyaryov machine guns, three of which were knocked out by enemy mortar fire. We practically had nothing left to fight with. Over those four or five days we lost two brothers-in-arms KIA and had forty-nine WIA. Nearly everyone suffered concussions and shrapnel wounds.
Later, when our unit was relieved by another, it turned out the scouts hadn’t spotted the movement, others didn’t make it in time, and the enemy pushed right up to our CP deeper into Bakhmut. That was our first defense there, roughly ten days of work directly in Bakhmut.
Our strength was fifteen to seventeen men; about three hundred were advancing on our side of the line.
Why did it play out that way? I don’t know; that sector is wooded, and if you’re attacking it’s easier to push through there and defending may also be easier because of the trees. We used the trees for cover. Even so, given that we had machine-gun positions, some of them, maybe five or ten percent, closed to within 30 meters of our lines, and one of them, by our count, crawled to within six meters. We never understood what he intended whether to surrender or to throw a grenade.
And I’ll say this: their blocking detachments were likely shooting them too, from behind. That first onslaught was brutal, a whole horde charging you, firing from who-knows-where, at night on top of it.
On the third or fourth TDY there, I was alongside former Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko. The lads took photos with him and asked questions. He pretended not to recognize me, though he remembered me from briefings on the Maidan cases.
Objectively speaking, he was there with us under fire at the CP, in the basement and he brought in a lot of ammo and a lot of drones. He didn’t seek me out to talk, probably didn’t want to, or it might have bled into work because I remember he once had the nerve to say on TV that there was no evidence in the "diamond prosecutors" case.
Maybe I would have argued the point with him. Still, if you hold the office of Prosecutor General, you can’t air your views without understanding the circumstances first-hand. I didn’t like him saying there was no evidence. If there’s no evidence, the verdict should be an acquittal. As for his service there, I have nothing bad to say.
When prisoners were granted the right to be mobilized, how did you take that law? Did you think about possibly ending up alongside someone you once prosecuted?
I actually did cross paths with some individuals who knew those I had prosecuted. And to give you an idea, some people linked to the Maidan cases even sent me greetings through counterintelligence while I was in Bakhmut. That happened, they were on the other side, fighting against us.
My brother-in-arms Pavlo had been in pre-trial detention, then partly convicted. Pavlo told me it was hard for him at first to even shake my hand, but once he saw how I fought and how I spoke to the men… We once pulled out a wounded comrade together in Bakhmut.
To put it briefly, I was glad he admitted that not everyone in the Prosecutor’s Office was as bad as he had thought.
And he wasn’t the only one. There were plenty. We were reinforced by another unit, if I recall correctly, a detachment of border guards from Sumy. Sadly, most of them were killed due to poor command decisions at the time. But among them were men who, when they saw us and asked questions, we were in semi-encirclement then, were very shaken and didn’t know what to do. Even we, civilians-turned-soldiers at the time, were giving orders, while they, though serving for a long time, seemed at a loss.
We had to snap them back to reality. And when they found out who I was, there was this silence, two or three minutes that pressed heavily. Because in battle you usually know where the fire is coming from. And suddenly there was this silence, and they looked at me wide-eyed: "On the zero line and a prosecutor."
Society doesn’t believe people like me could be there.
I don’t know. I didn’t go to brag. At that time, when I left the Territorial Defense, I was just a private. Though, again, I do have my own rank: Senior Counselor of Justice, the military equivalent of a colonel.
20 years in the prosecutor's office. What kind of path is this for you?
Until 2011-2012, I worked directly at the Obolonskyi district prosecutor's office, there were very complicated cases, and I was sent to such ordinary complicated cases to solve them, perhaps I did not find any consensus there. And the judges, again, began to treat me well because of their authority, and some of them became very good friends.
The case of the "wassailer" judge Zvarych came to the Obolonskyi court.
I was included in the team of prosecutors, and given that within two years we managed to secure a conviction, together with a group from the Prosecutor General’s Office, they saw my work and decided that I was ready to represent the prosecution on behalf of the state. That was direct proof of my capability.
He is the only judge in Ukraine who actually served nearly ten years in prison under a corresponding court ruling.
You handled the Maidan cases and were part of the prosecutors’ group.
I became involved in the Maidan case from the very beginning. At that time, Yarema was the Prosecutor General. In January, the pre-trial detention term for the first "Berkut" officers, Zinchenko and Abroskin, was expiring. Their case, just the two of them, was then referred to court. At the time I was working in the General Inspectorate, and we already had the "diamond prosecutors" case, the "garbage case," and other corruption offenses involving regional prosecutors, all practically already in court.
Since 2015, that case has been in court. As you can see, it’s been more than ten years now. But last year there was finally a verdict. So by the time I went to war, we had been supporting the prosecution in that case for eight years.
In 2019 the court decided to replace your prosecutorial group.
Ah, you mean the replacement. By then we had already lost a lot of time in that case, mainly because the ballistic examinations had not been completed.
At that time, the issue repeatedly arose of exchanging those Berkut officers for some of our people who had been held captive since 2014. And in some ways, if I recall conversations with those individuals, it’s not that they were entirely bad men, but I understand what those charges meant. They fired on people, and the court indeed found that killings had taken place.
As far as I remember, at first they refused to be exchanged. Later, at the end of 2019, when the question of extending their preventive measure came up, that side expressed a desire to be included in the exchange group.
We were told that without those five Berkut officers, the exchange would not happen at all. I remember the tears when our captives returned by plane, there were 76 of them, if I recall correctly.
Given the massive volume of the prosecution’s case, we were not even at the end but only in the middle. And the court did indeed comment at the time that this was a disruption of the proceedings. But we understand that it was a presidential decision.
Our position was that they should not be exchanged, though I did have doubts, perhaps some of them didn’t even want to be exchanged, perhaps the circumstances forced them, or maybe they were pressured.
No one really knew how to carry this out. During the appeals hearings we did not change our position as prosecutors in that case. We supported the victims’ side, insisting that such an exchange was neither possible nor appropriate.
But then the order came down. For some reason, at the level of the president or the prosecutor general, a decision was made to remove us from the prosecutorial group, and another team of prosecutors took over.
Again, that’s just how it happened. No one explained anything to anyone. For whatever reason, it happened the way it did. Of course, we lost two years in that case, although after some time two of the defendants did return.
Later the question arose as to why we were replaced. We never received any explanation.
In court at that time, the victims gave you a round of applause.
It was very difficult. You know, after listening to pain for seven years, I couldn’t even sleep properly for a while.
And then you look into people’s eyes as they ask: what did they die for? And now, what are our boys dying for? Of course it was gratifying, but it was also painful, because we explained to them that we couldn’t change anything, it wasn’t up to us. We tried to support them however we could.
As for former Berkut and National Guard officers who in 2014 during the Maidan, and later in 2022, went on to fight in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, did you encounter any of them?
Yes, I even served in the same unit with some of them. They had been with the former Berkut. When they learned I was a prosecutor, they spent two or three weeks just watching me, watching how the other guys interacted with me.
It’s interesting to hear your reflection on the fact that before the war you were on opposite sides of the law, and now you find yourselves in the same boat.
You know, I’ll put it this way. I told you earlier that our Maidan department investigated criminal proceedings not only against police officers who committed crimes against Maidan protesters, but we also had about 40 cases involving Ukrainian citizens, the majority of them Maidan activists, who committed criminal offenses against police officers at the time. Whenever we investigated, both I and most of my colleagues in the Maidan department of the Prosecutor’s Office tried to show objectively that we were pursuing both types of cases.
And I personally believe that everyone should be held accountable. You can’t exempt some from responsibility while leaving only others to answer. Of course, society has its own understanding, a kind of collective judgment, of what happened.
Most of the conscripts from the Internal Troops, now the National Guard, were simply carrying out the orders they were given: stand here, hold this line. In the majority of cases they didn’t even beat protesters; more often than not, they were the ones beaten by Maidan activists.
As for Berkut, that’s another matter. Even within Berkut there were men who didn’t fully support what was happening, but because of their official duties they were compelled to be there. Either stay, or resign.
Some did resign, there were such cases of officers leaving the service. Others, for their own reasons, whether it was the paycheck, the need to support their families, or simply clinging to job security, chose to stay.
And what is your attitude toward those men, those you once prosecuted? Can you now call them brothers-in-arms?
Given the circumstances, yes, I can. I understand that people are tested in such times. Perhaps in another situation they would have acted differently. But here, they stood alongside others to defend Ukraine.
The scandal over "disabled prosecutors", how did you see it?
You know, this problem needs to be viewed not from two sides, but from three. There’s a saying that every coin has two sides, but people forget about the edge of the coin.
I personally know several prosecutors from Khmelnytskyi who truly have medical conditions serious enough that they could have retired, yet they continue to work. Such issues must be approached carefully and objectively.
Because some, despite their illnesses, remain in service and do their jobs, while others exploit their positions. They tarnish the honor of the entire prosecution service. That’s wrong. They put their personal interests above all else.
And you know, when comrades-in-arms see this, some have the audacity not to insult me, but to taunt me: "Look at those great guys, you’re fighting at the front, and they’re all ‘disabled.’"
What do you say in response?
I tell them, "I’m here with you. They’re over there."
You’ve called the Zvarych case one of the most important and successful prosecutions you led in court.
Yes, it was heard by the Obolonskyi District Court, Judge Vladyslav Deviatko presiding. He later gave a recommendation to the new Prosecutor General, Ruslan Kravchenko, who was the lead prosecutor in Yanukovych’s case. Former Chief Military Prosecutor Anatolii Matios has also referred to the Zvarych case as his own.
I’ve known both of them. I first met Vladyslav Deviatko back in 2002, when I joined the Obolonskyi Prosecutor’s Office. At that time he was an assistant prosecutor specializing in representing the state in court.
Later, after further training and passing exams, he transitioned to the bench and became a judge. I remained in the Prosecutor’s Office, continuing to represent the prosecution in court.
Did you ever cross paths professionally with Anatolii Matios?
Personally, I am not acquainted with him, though he likely saw me at some meetings on the Maidan cases. At that time, the current Prosecutor General and his colleague, who is now, as I understand, the First Deputy Prosecutor General for Crimea, were also present. These meetings concerned the ongoing case in the Obolon District Court and cooperation with our department, then headed by Serhii Horbatiuk, on coordinating evidence and consultations among prosecutors representing the state in court. Such exchanges took place at those meetings.
What I know is that after the events of the so-called "diamond prosecutors" case, when the General Inspectorate was disbanded along with the prosecutorial team working on that case, it was reportedly under his leadership that those classified materials from the Inspectorate were reviewed. Perhaps it was on the Prosecutor General’s instruction, perhaps due to a reshuffling of prosecutors, I cannot say for sure.
I cannot confirm whether it was lawful or not, but according to others, those Inspectorate materials, including records of covert investigative actions, were reviewed either on his orders or by him personally. That’s what I heard. And I can confirm that, as far as I know, after this disclosure, several operational case files, five or six disappeared.
Those cases were likely reassigned to other prosecutors and then closed, since the covert surveillance measures had been compromised. Later there were even reports of a criminal case being opened for the alleged disclosure of state secrets by members of the General Inspectorate, by us, the prosecutors then working under Sakvarelidze. But to my knowledge, that case was also closed, since no facts were established; I wasn’t even summoned for questioning to clarify the circumstances.
All I know, based on what others told me, is that those materials ended up being made available to him directly. I cannot say whether he personally read them or not, but such information was circulating.
Do you know where he is serving now? Because there are only photos of him in uniform.
I can only pass on the words I heard, so it’s clear that even regarding those classified materials, the information came from others.
I cannot say with certainty that he personally read those classified files. But given that those materials were never acted upon and all the operational cases were compromised, it is a fact that the secrets of our criminal proceedings were disclosed during the Inspectorate’s existence between 2016 and 2019.
Can we talk about your title and position now?
I currently hold the rank of junior sergeant and command a squad in a company of the battalion, officially known as the 412th Separate Regiment of Unmanned Systems, called NEMESIS.
Our main drone is a NEMESIS drone.
It so happened that our commander, then the commander of a mechanized company in the 251st Battalion, decided that since many of us were older men, it was time to stop running through trenches and instead do what we could be more effective at, serving in a UAV unit.
Just the other night, my ground team destroyed a tank. We even managed to finish off its crew.
A lot of our drones get shot down, especially since order isn’t always maintained along the line of contact. When coordination is lacking, sometimes we even lose drones to friendly fire. But right now, most of our work is focused on enemy equipment. We even took out a TOR air defense system, for which the guys were awarded Golden Crosses.
That strike was carried out at a distance of over 40 kilometers. Our equipment makes that possible and thank God, we pulled it off.
Our regiment is among the most recognized in UAV circles. We are in the TOP 10 units for destroying enemy equipment and carrying out such missions. I consider that a very strong record, and I’m grateful to the men for their determination to keep fighting and achieving results.
Even if a real "monster" comes at us, we can defend ourselves. And, of course, we honor our fallen comrades. That remains our driving motivation.
Now I can already feel myself beginning to burn out. I realize that, given my health, I may not be able to fight like the younger men in the assault brigades. Maybe I still have some fight left in me, but perhaps it’s time, as everyone keeps telling me, to return to the Prosecutor’s Office and bring order there.
Could you have left the service at any stage?
As far as I understand the law, no. Since my exemption was not taken into account when I was drafted, and I did not object, it is considered that I was mobilized.
Perhaps amendments to legislation could change that.
Maybe now the Prosecutor General will consider the issue of prosecutors serving at the front, or perhaps a system of military justice will be established. I am ready to return to my work.
I wanted to keep silent, but I will say this, this is the cornerstone, and it is also an issue for the current Prosecutor General. If he foresees this, that is very good.
I believe that right now society is demanding direct accountability of the command. Too often we hear shouts that all soldiers break the law, that there are AWOL cases and so on. Yet we only hear of isolated cases of commanders being held accountable.
And yet, in some instances, it is the commanders who are truly at fault for the deaths of soldiers. Poor leadership, poor orientation, and other failures must be investigated.
The second pillar is property.
We see how aid is obtained, and how certain individuals profit while our troops are supposed to receive the weapons they need to defend themselves, not even to attack, just to defend. And in this area as well, if fraud and corruption occur in procurement, people must be held accountable, clearly and demonstrably.
But it shouldn’t just be one token scapegoat. This must be systematic work, with clear accountability for who allowed it, who permitted it, who failed to exercise proper oversight. There must be a chain of responsibility. One commander cannot break the rules without higher command knowing about it.
In this, the prosecutor’s role is crucial. We must not be creating artificial performance metrics, but actually influencing the situation on the ground.
There is a clear demand among soldiers for justice.
It is painful. And I take full responsibility for my words.
This justice, this social justice, means punishing those responsible for the deaths of soldiers. I understand, it’s war, and sometimes you have to cover a sector where people will inevitably die. But it must be done in a way that minimizes losses.
Why, given this reality, can we not change the law? These circumstances are crying out for legislative change. In my subjective view, now is precisely the time to make such changes to save the state. Step back, look at the situation, and think through how it can be done.
What was your reaction to the vote for curbing the powers of NABU and SAPO?
Speaking subjectively, wearing both hats as a prosecutor and now a serviceman, I tend to look at certain things through both lenses. In essence, I’ll repeat a familiar line: someone in the military, as I am now, and a prosecutor, is not afforded the right to speak out and criticize the authorities.
I’ll leave it at that, suffice it to say that society sees everything.
*******************************************************
P.S.
If you don’t mind, I’d like to name the people.
Well, I think I should, if they see this piece, they’ll be very offended if I don’t mention them. My company commander was Anton Serbin; he was leading us then, and he even wanted to hand me his own rifle because mine had been damaged in a shelling that saved my life.
Then I want to name Andriy, our deputy, the so-called political officer. And the guys who were with me on the line, in the vehicles: that’s Panda, Serhii Franchuk; also Oleksandr Lysenko; Kalman, Kyrylo; who else… Pasha Pylypenko; Vova "Prorab," our "Dereva." Then Serhii Moroz, and there was another, Hlib. These were the men who were with me on position, specifically on the vehicles. Over at the allotments were my brothers-in-arms, Oleksii Smirnov "Enotik," Yaroslav Chelombitko, Andrii Vysotskyi "Obolon." There were others too. Forgive me if I forget some surnames, I remember them all, especially now that I’m standing on their soil here in Vyshhorod. These are our so-called Makhnovites. I call them the Mezhyhirya lads. They helped defend Kyiv region together with DIU around Chornobyl and Mezhyhirya. Later they joined our company as a separate platoon when we went to Bakhmut. We gathered recently; our brother-in-arms "Uncle Hennadii" was killed, about two weeks ago the whole of Vyshhorod buried him. And Myroslav is their commander.
I want to remember them all. I may not recall all the surnames. Among them was a former Berkut officer with the callsign "Barkas." There was also a guy "Uholok." And there was Petia, he knows who I mean, he commanded his own unit. And I can’t forget Kruh, the lawyer, callsign "Kruh." He was among the wounded. He had severe bleeding from his leg. We put on one tourniquet, no effect. Put on a second. When we got him to the hospital, thank God, the doctor said: "You’re all blockheads; you don’t know how to apply a tourniquet, he’s still bleeding." But then added: "If you’d applied it ‘properly,’ he’d have lost the leg."
So in a way you think: thank God for those clumsy hands, they saved his leg. He pulled through; he came to Uncle’s funeral recently. I also want to mention Robert, commander of our 1st platoon in this company. He’s having health issues now, and I send him my regards. To all who fought with us.
I don’t want to forget the mechanized company of the 251st Battalion, with which I fought in Bakhmut. And as for Moshchun, let me mention all my immediate commanders there. They led our platoons well, guided us, and we were able to help the 72nd Brigade hold the line here.
