HAC refuses SBU general Vitiuk's defence request to split case

HAC refuses SBU general Vitiuk's defence request to split case
HAC refuses SBU general Vitiuk's defence request to split case

Court rejects defence request

The High Anti-Corruption Court (HAC) refused the defence of Illia Vitiuk, former head of the SBU Cybersecurity Department, in its motion to split the criminal case.

During today's preparatory hearing, lawyers attempted to separate two of the three episodes into a separate case and transfer them to the Solomianskyi District Court of Kyiv.

As reported by the Anti-Corruption Centre "MEZHA", the court kept the entire case within HAC jurisdiction.

Arguments of the parties

The defence insisted that at the time of the two alleged acts, Vitiuk was not subject to HAC jurisdiction, as he held a different position at that time. Lawyers argued that the general committed only the third crime episode while holding a position within HAC jurisdiction.

The prosecutor disputed this position. He emphasised that since at least one episode is within HAC jurisdiction and all episodes are interconnected, the court has the full right to consider the entire case comprehensively. In the prosecution's view, there are no grounds to transfer part of the case to a local court.

Issues with access to documents

In addition to the jurisdiction issue, the defence raised the problem of access to case materials. Lawyers stated that despite established deadlines, they were unable to fully review the evidence due to technical glitches with electronic documents and violations of the review procedure.

The court postponed the consideration of this motion to the next hearing. The judge suggested that the defence contact the prosecutor directly, who, according to him, is ready to provide the necessary materials.

Case context

On 2 September 2025, the NABU and SAP notified Vitiuk of suspicion of illegal enrichment and providing false information in a declaration.

According to the investigation, in December 2023, the official purchased an apartment for 21.6 million hryvnia, registering it in the name of a family member. Meanwhile, the value of the real estate was understated to 12.8 million hryvnia in the purchase and sale agreement.

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first!

Leave a comment

Links are not allowed in comments. The editors may remove comments without explanation.
Back to top ↑