Court ordered registration of Arakhamia allegations, AntiAC says
The Anti-Corruption Action Centre reported a November 4 court ruling. It concerns entering information in the investigations register, not serving a notice of suspicion.
Ukraine’s High Anti-Corruption Court on November 4, 2026, ordered acting Prosecutor General Anton Kovalskyi to enter information about a possible crime by Servant of the People parliamentary faction leader Davyd Arakhamia into the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations. The Anti-Corruption Action Centre (AntiAC), whose complaint about the prosecution chief’s inaction was heard by the court, reported the decision. According to the organisation, investigating judge Markiian Halabala upheld its complaint.
AntiAC’s complaint concerns allegations that Arakhamia distributed envelopes containing unlawful payments to MPs for votes in the Verkhovna Rada. These are the complainant’s allegations, not a judicial finding of guilt. In its November 5 article, the outlet Strana writes that Arakhamia denies the allegations.
According to AntiAC’s account, the Prosecutor General’s Office forwarded the complaint to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), citing an investigation into similar circumstances. At the hearing, the prosecutor asked the court to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the information could be examined within an existing investigation into a group of MPs allegedly receiving improper benefits. AntiAC says the judge rejected that position.
A November 3 NABU letter published by AntiAC says the bureau itself forwarded the complaint concerning Arakhamia to the Prosecutor General’s Office, citing Articles 482² and 214 of the Criminal Procedure Code. At the time of its response, the bureau had no information that the relevant details had been entered into the register. The letter, signed by detective unit head Pavlo Yershov, states that detectives cannot investigate the circumstances set out in the complaint concerning Arakhamia without those details being entered by the prosecutor general or acting prosecutor general.
The complainant’s report therefore describes a decision to register information for an investigation, not to notify Arakhamia of suspicion. The phrase “register suspicion”, used in Strana’s November 5 Telegram post, inaccurately describes this stage. Later in its full article, the outlet itself also refers specifically to entering information into the register.
In its November 4 statement, AntiAC did not specify whether the information had been entered into the register following the court ruling. NABU’s letter saying it had no information about registration is dated the previous day, before the complaint was heard.
Primary sources
Documents and statements this story is based on.