UAH 141.3m electricity case: investigation completed
NABU and SAPO have opened the case materials to the defence over payments to solar plants in occupied territory. Investigators allege the electricity never reached Ukraine’s grid.
On 9 November 2026, Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) announced the completion of a pretrial investigation into UAH 141.3 million in feed-in tariff payments to solar plants in the occupied part of Zaporizhzhia region. The materials have been opened to the defence. Investigators allege that the state enterprise Guaranteed Buyer paid for electricity that did not actually reach Ukraine’s power system.
Nine people were notified of suspicion in January 2026. They include former deputy head of the Presidential Office Rostyslav Shurma, his brother Oleh, an associate of the former official, managers and employees of companies under their control, and a former commercial director of Zaporizhzhiaoblenergo. The current stage gives the defence access to the collected materials; no submission of an indictment to a court has yet been announced.
Investigators describe the following mechanism: in 2019–2020, the brothers consolidated control over renewable electricity companies, built solar plants with a combined capacity of about 60 MW in Vasylivka district, and signed contracts with the state buyer. After Russia’s full-scale invasion and the occupation, the plants lost their connection to Ukraine’s power system, suffered damage, and their staff were evacuated.
Despite this, detectives allege, the companies continued declaring generation and receiving payments. Their reports contained false production volumes and claims about the equipment’s operational readiness, including during periods of complete power loss. Investigators allege that the money was subsequently channelled out through related companies. The alleged losses total UAH 141.3 million.
The problem described by investigators is therefore not payment to plants in occupied territory in itself, but the gap between the reporting used to obtain money and the actual delivery of electricity. For the state buyer, this concerns verifying what it pays for. The published account of the case does not explain who specifically was supposed to cross-check these figures or why the loss of the grid connection did not stop payments.
Rostyslav Shurma previously said he did not admit guilt, that neither he nor his brother was hiding, and that he was ready to cooperate with investigators within the law. The alleged scheme and the amount of losses remain the prosecution’s claims; guilt must be determined by a court.
Opening the materials does not mean UAH 141.3 million has been recovered. Accountability for state funds still involves two specific questions: how to recover the alleged losses if they are proven, and at what stage of verification the plants’ physical disconnection should have stopped the payments.
Primary sources
Documents and statements this story is based on.