What happened
Investigators of the Kyiv Police, with the support of SBU operatives, exposed the deputy general director of the Kyiv Scientific and Methodological Center of the Department for Protection of Cultural Heritage of the Kyiv City State Administration for embezzlement of budget funds. He is suspected of inflating the volumes and costs of works during the reconstruction of one of the cells of the Floriv Monastery. Sources: UNN with reference to the Main Department of the National Police in Kyiv.
"Upon completion of the works, the suspect, in collusion with the contractor, signed reporting documents for the latter in which larger volumes of work and their costs were deliberately indicated. As a result, more than 15 million hryvnias of budget funds were subsequently transferred to the company's account, of which 666 thousand hryvnias constituted an overpayment."
— Main Department of the National Police in Kyiv
Case details
According to investigators, a contract was signed between the municipal enterprise (represented by the 53-year-old official) and a private firm for construction, restoration and major repairs of the cell. After the works were completed, the signed reporting documents contained inflated volumes and prices — as a result, more than UAH 15 million was withdrawn from the contractor's account, and the overpayment amounted to UAH 666,000.
Legal qualification and penalties
The official has been notified of suspicion under Part 4 of Article 191 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine — embezzlement of another's property by abuse of official position, committed by prior conspiracy under conditions of martial law, in large amounts. The article's sanction is up to eight years' imprisonment with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for up to three years.
In addition, law enforcement is documenting another episode: the official allegedly concealed more than UAH 4 million in income from activities of a Polish company and did not report these data in his annual declaration — a separate factor that affects the completeness of the investigation and may lead to additional criminal charges.
Why this matters
This is not just about figures. Restoration of heritage sites is a zone of heightened public interest: it brings together questions of national identity, security and efficiency of spending during wartime. The expert anti-corruption community has long warned that in conditions of accelerated contracts and a large number of restoration projects the risk of abuses increases. Control and transparency in such projects are not a formality but a direct contribution to trust in institutions and to the state's defense capability.
What’s next
The investigation continues: the role of the contractor and possible accomplices are in focus. Beyond criminal prosecution, this is an opportunity for city authorities to strengthen internal control over restoration works and increase tender transparency. The question for society and the authorities is whether that will be enough to reduce the risk of similar schemes recurring and to protect both budget funds and our cultural heritage.
