Essence of the decision
On January 24, the company D.Trading (the DTEK energy holding) officially approached NAEK "Energoatom" with an initiative to prematurely terminate the electricity purchase agreement concluded as a result of the January 14 auction. In its statement, D.Trading refers to a broad public discussion and "critical assessments from the expert community regarding the external circumstances and conditions under which the auction was held."
What the parties say
"For DTEK, an unimpeachable reputation is an absolute priority"
— D.Trading (DTEK group), official statement
The statement also emphasizes that D.Trading participated in the auction "in full compliance with all lawful procedures" and decided to initiate the contract termination precisely because of the public resonance surrounding the terms of the trading.
"Energoatom lost about UAH 2 billion by selling a significant volume of electricity before the price caps were raised. This happened due to blatant incompetence or corrupt interest"
— Andriy Herus, chairman of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Energy
Context and consequences
At the January 14 auction D.Trading purchased nearly 20% of the volume. According to calculations by the publication "Our Money," the company could have gained about UAH 400 million from the price differential after the price caps were raised. At the same time, the head of the parliamentary energy committee put Energoatom's potential losses at about UAH 2 billion, expressing suspicions of incompetence or corrupt interest.
This story did not arise out of nowhere: in November NABU conducted more than 70 searches as part of an investigation into corruption at Energoatom (operation "Midas"), and the investigative actions concluded with charges announced against certain suspects. In response, the Cabinet of Ministers dissolved Energoatom's supervisory board and planned to appoint a new composition that is to select the company's management.
What’s next
D.Trading's decision serves as an indicator: even large players are prepared to incur short-term financial losses to preserve their reputation. For the market, it signals that transparency of procedures is becoming a critical condition for trust. Three key consequences to watch:
1) Intensified investigations by NABU/SAP and demands that NKREKP and Energoatom publish the auction documents. 2) A possible need to re-run the auctions or adjust the rules to restore buyers' and suppliers' trust. 3) A reputational effect for market participants: some businesses may opt for a "reputational minimum" instead of short-term profit.
Ultimately, the ball is in the regulator's and law enforcement agencies' court: whether they can promptly and on the record determine if there were procedural violations, and whether such steps will restore trust in the electricity market — a key question for the country's energy security.
