Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

"140 Million for Freedom: Who and Why Is Ready to Pay Bail for Yermak"

The Specialized Anti-Corruption Court arrested the former head of the Presidential Office for 60 days and set bail equal to the value of several apartments in the capital. Even before the decision came into force, unknown foreigners called the defendant's lawyer offering money.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

May 14, 2026 · 2 min read

"140 Million for Freedom: Who and Why Is Ready to Pay Bail for Yermak"
Адвокат Ігор Фомін (Фото: LIGA.Редакція)

On May 14, the Higher Anti-Corruption Court selected a preventive measure for Andriy Yermak, the former head of the Presidential Office, in the form of detention for 60 days with the possibility of release on bail of 140 million hryvnias — approximately $3.4 million. The decision came into force immediately after it was announced.

Already the next day, lawyer Ihor Fomin reported an unexpected reaction: money was being offered by people he personally does not know, including from abroad.

"I'm even surprised, to be honest. I don't know these people at all,"

— lawyer Ihor Fomin, LIGA.Redaktsiya

According to Fomin, part of the funds have already started to be paid — in particular by one of his fellow lawyers. Yermak himself stated in court that he does not have his own 140 million, but "has many friends and acquaintances who could probably help."

The charges

According to NABU and SAP, between 2021–2025, an organized group "laundered" over 460 million hryvnias through the construction of an elite cottage village "Dynastiya" in Kozyn, Kyiv region — 8 hectares with four private residences and its own spa zone. The SAP prosecutor during the hearing stated: Yermak in this scheme was responsible for financing, while former Vice Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernysov — for organization and conspiracy. Yermak and six other suspects have been notified of suspicion under Part 3 of Article 209 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (money laundering on an especially large scale).

The first journalistic materials about "Dynastiya" were published in July 2025 — by Bihus.info. NABU recorded conversations in the apartment of sanctioned businessman Timur Mindich (operative pseudonym "Karlson"); in the case materials, Yermak appears under the pseudonym R2.

Terms of release on bail

If 140 million hryvnias are paid, Yermak is obligated to: not leave Kyiv, surrender his passports, wear an electronic bracelet, and not communicate with the suspects — Chernysov, Mindich, Lysenko, Opalchuk, Siranchuk, Medvedeva — and at least 18 specified witnesses.

What's next

The defense is appealing the HACC decision and separately plans to challenge the suspicion itself. Lawyer Fomin called the case "absurd." The court was to publish the full text of the ruling on May 18.

The real question now is not whether bail will appear — judging by the flow of calls, the funds will most likely be paid. The question is different: if the appeal leaves the suspicion in force, is the defense ready to take the case to court on the merits — and will this readiness hold up when, instead of abstract accusations, concrete evidence from the "Midas" case appears?

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