UAH 1.2 million returned to Kyiv: case over inflated prices during Hydropark repairs and its significance during the war
The head of a contracting firm has been referred to court for official negligence — the budget overpaid more than UAH 1.2 million. This is not just a criminal case, but a signal of gaps in the oversight of public funds at a critical time for the country.
By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik
February 13, 2026 · 2 min read
What happened
The Dniprovskyi District Prosecutor's Office of the city of Kyiv has forwarded an indictment to court against the head of the company that carried out the capital repairs of Hydropark from December 2024 to October of the same year. The investigation established that **the head signed acts with inflated prices for construction materials**, without verifying the justification for their cost. As a result, the city budget was overcharged by more than **UAH 1.2 million**.
Details and consequences
During the pre-trial investigation the defendant reimbursed the caused damages and voluntarily transferred **UAH 200,000** to the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The actions of the head have been qualified under Part 2 of Article 367 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine; the case has been forwarded to court for consideration on the merits.
Context: why this matters
When the country spends every hryvnia under full-scale war conditions, such cases have a double effect: direct budget losses and a drop in trust in the public procurement system. **The problem is not only individual overpayments — it lies in gaps in control that allow budgets to be inflated or prices to be coordinated between entities**.
More in the case
In December last year law enforcement officials notified three officials of suspicion in embezzling more than UAH 1.2 million during the capital repair of Hydropark: the deputy head of the management of the municipal enterprise "Kyivzelenbud", the director of a private company, and an estimator are accused of collusion and inflating prices for building materials.
"The actions of the head of the enterprise have been qualified under Part 2 of Article 367 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The case has been sent to court for consideration on the merits."
— Kyiv City Prosecutor's Office
Conclusion
The case must be considered by a court — and this is a test for the system: will the law work, not just public resonance. For now, the case underscores the need to strengthen control over estimates, ensure transparent procurement procedures, and ensure a swift response from anti-corruption mechanisms. In wartime, effective financial control is not bureaucracy but an element of national security. Whether institutions can fix the identified gaps is a question Kyiv residents and the state are awaiting answers to.
