Today, 21 August, at 14:00, a hearing of the High Anti-Corruption Court will begin to consider the application of a preventive measure against the former deputy head of the Office of the President of Ukraine.
The HACC press service reported this.
“The HACC has scheduled consideration of a motion to apply a preventive measure against the former deputy head of the Office of the President of Ukraine. In response to numerous requests from media representatives, we inform you that consideration of the motion to apply a preventive measure against the former deputy head of the Office of the President of Ukraine is scheduled for 21 August 2026 at 14:00,” they said.
As can be understood, this concerns Iryna Mudra.
The hearing will take place at the HACC premises at: 41 Beresteiskyy Avenue, courtroom No. 10.
Background
- On 19 August, NABU reported conducting the Forrest Gump special operation to expose a criminal organisation in government. According to the investigation, it involves the laundering of 150 million hryvnyas in cash. The money was brought into legal circulation to pay bail for one of the members of the criminal organisation in the Midas case.
- NABU did not provide any names, but it can be assumed this concerns Herman Halushchenko. According to investigators, the organisation that laundered the funds included: a deputy head of the President’s Office (according to LB, Iryna Mudra, who was subjected to investigative actions), a former MP, the head of a state bank, the chair of the supervisory board of a state bank, and other individuals. LB sources said these were representatives of the former Opposition Platform—For Life.
- A few hours after that, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy dismissed Iryna Mudra from her post as deputy head of the Office of the President of Ukraine.
- Mudra’s lawyer confirmed that she was notified of suspicion and was served with a motion for a preventive measure. At the same time, he denied reports of her detention and said the defense is still reviewing the case materials and therefore is not commenting on the substantiation of the suspicion.