Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Finances

Zhevago in Paris notified of suspicion: what this means for banking accountability and investors

On March 19 in Paris, Kostyantyn Zhevago was served with a notice of suspicion in the case of the bank "Finance and Credit." We examine why this matters for confidence in the financial sector and what comes next for businesses and depositors.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

March 19, 2026 · 2 min read

Zhevago in Paris notified of suspicion: what this means for banking accountability and investors
Фото: Офіс генпрокурора

What happened

On March 19 in Paris, businessman Kostyantyn Zhevago personally received a notification of suspicion in the case of the bank "Finance and Credit". The delivery was reported by Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko and the press service of the DBR. The National Bank of Ukraine declared the bank insolvent back in 2015.

"It is essentially about the use of the bank's financial resources, including depositors' funds and refinancing from the National Bank of Ukraine, for the private interests of the beneficiary"

— Ruslan Kravchenko, Prosecutor General

The charges

The DBR accuses him of organizing a scheme for the systematic withdrawal and laundering of the bank's funds through a network of controlled companies and foreign financial institutions. As of the investigation, damages of more than UAH 519 million have been established. The DBR had already announced the case in May 2024.

Context: who and for what

Zhevago is an entrepreneur who twice attempted to avoid extradition from France and who served as a lawmaker for six convocations. He is also accused of other offences: NABU accuses him of bribery, and the DBR — of extracting funds from F&C. Corporate assets — the pharmaceutical holding "Arterium" and companies associated with Ferrexpo — have been placed at risk of bankruptcy; the developments within the corporation were reported, in particular, by LIGA.net.

Why this matters to the reader

This case has several dimensions that affect public interest: first, the accountability of owners for the consequences to depositors and taxpayers; second, the impact on the investment climate — foreign and local investors are closely watching whether institutions are functioning; third, the potential social consequences for employees of enterprises linked to Zhevago's business.

Analysts note that the outcomes of this case will affect not only the fates of specific companies but also send a signal to other major owners: whether the state's response will be systemic rather than situational.

Positions and possible further developments

Zhevago himself describes the notification as political persecution. Investigative actions included an interrogation in the relevant procedural status. Possible next steps include: transfer of materials to court, assessment of the evidentiary base, international cooperation regarding assets and, if necessary, extradition procedures.

Summary

This is not only the criminal story of one businessman — it is a test for the system: whether institutions will be able to carry complex financial cases through to convictions and restore trust in the financial sector. Whether the suspicions will turn into convictions, and how that will affect investment behaviour, are questions that the next stage of the investigation and the court process will answer.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026