Conflict of Interest and a Million with the Ex-Wife: What Detectives Are Checking Regarding the Head of the Tiachiv Migration Service, Dmytro Soima

Anti-corruption bodies are demanding that banks disclose banking secrecy information regarding Dmytro Soima, the likely head of the Tiachiv department of the migration service. The official is suspected of committing an administrative offense, namely concealing a conflict of interest from higher management for more than a year.

This became known to UA.NEWS journalists from their own sources.

What information interested detectives

Detectives are studying circumstances provided for under Part 1 of Article 172-8 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses (illegal disclosure or use for personal interests of information that became known in connection with the performance of official duties).

The investigation covers the period from January 1 to December 31, 2025.

The agency sent requests to banking institutions demanding comprehensive data constituting bank secrecy:

• Account availability: a full list of all Soima’s account numbers with the dates of their opening and closing.
• Incoming funds: detailed information on all incoming transactions (dates, amounts, and payment purposes).
• Counterparty data: identification details of all persons and companies who transferred money to the official or received funds from him (full names of individuals, names and EDRPOU codes of legal entities).
• Movement of funds for each payment: account numbers and bank codes of all counterparties.

Conflict of interest: how Soima concealed his wife

As a 13th-rank civil servant and a subject responsible for corruption-related compliance, Dmytro Soima should have informed his direct management that he lived in the same apartment as his subordinate, but the official did not do so (this concerns 2013–2014).

During the court hearing, Soima considered himself innocent and explained to the court that he had married his subordinate back in 2009, later they had a daughter, but the family life did not work out and the couple decided to divorce and live separately.

The subordinate wife, Renata Shelever, moved with their daughter to another house, and Soima said that in order not to cause moral distress to the child he drove the girl to kindergarten every morning and sometimes gave his ex-wife a lift to work (since they worked in the same institution). Soima also acknowledged that he and Renata traveled to Hungary, but allegedly for the sake of the child, who needed treatment in the city of Kisvárda. In reality, Soima had already been living in a de facto marriage with another woman for six months.

“That is not true,” witnesses said

After the official divorce from the head of the migration service unit, his ex-wife Renata Shelever continued working in the same Tiachiv migration service department. Moreover, as stated in court materials, her career in the unit gradually progressed — she was appointed chief specialist of the Tiachiv district department of the State Migration Service and later chief specialist for centralized document processing.

During the court hearing, an alternative version appeared. One of the witnesses stated that she was in a close relationship with Dmytro Soima and that he regularly came to her house in a Niva car. According to her, the man left the vehicle in her garage and stayed overnight at her place.

However, the court treated these statements critically, considering them aimed at avoiding responsibility.

Instead, other witnesses and written evidence indicated something different — that after the formal divorce, Soima continued living with his former wife Renata Shelever. The couple even took vacations from work on the same days.

The totality of these circumstances was regarded by the court as confirmation that family relations between the head of the unit and his subordinate had in fact continued despite the formal divorce.

The judge concluded that there was a conflict of interest and found Dmytro Soima guilty of violating anti-corruption legislation under the current norms.

The punishment at that time appeared symbolic — a fine of 500 hryvnias.

Still not together

Dmytro Soima disagreed with the decision of the court of first instance and filed an appeal.

In his complaint he insisted that after the divorce he and his wife did not live together. According to him, he only frequently visited his daughter — picking her up from kindergarten, spending time with her, and sometimes taking her abroad for treatment. In his view, this was merely the fulfillment of parental duties and not proof of cohabitation.

In addition, during the appeal hearing it became known that the man was in a de facto relationship with another woman and lived with her in the village of Chumalovo in Tiachiv district. A witness confirmed that they had been together since mid-2013: the man arrived at her place late in the evening and left for work in the morning.

The appellate court also paid attention to the testimony of neighbors. Most of them only saw the former spouses sometimes coming or leaving the house together with their child. But none of the witnesses could confirm that they actually lived together or ran a joint household.

The court noted that in order to consider people “close persons” under anti-corruption legislation, three characteristics must be proven simultaneously — joint residence, a shared household, and mutual rights and obligations. In this case, the court of first instance effectively established only one of them — possible residence at the same address. The other features were not proven.

As a result, the appellate court concluded that there was no administrative offense. The district court’s decision was canceled and the proceedings in the case were closed.

Soima’s declarations

Since 2017, the list of property declared by the official has not changed:

• a 730 m² land plot,
• a 76 m² residential house,
• an old VAZ-212140, the same Niva, which belongs to Dmytro Soima’s mother,
• and a salary of about 35,000 hryvnias per month in 2025.

At the same time, in his annual declarations the official does not list his former wife as a family member. However, according to the law, family members for declaration purposes also include persons who live together, maintain a joint household, and have mutual rights and obligations, even without a registered marriage.

A millionaire from the Migration Service

Soima’s former wife, Renata Shelever, still holds the position of chief specialist in the migration service. Notably, she declares significantly greater wealth than her supervisor Dmytro Soima.

For example, in the “Cash Assets” section of her 2025 declaration, Renata declared 1,000,000 hryvnias in cash, though she indicated her father as the owner of the funds.

In addition, in 2024 the official managed to purchase an Audi A6 (2013) for 149,000 hryvnias (approximately $3,700), while the price of such a car on open online marketplaces starts at about $11,000.

In August 2025, Renata received half of a 303.32 m² house as a gift — just two months after searches were reportedly conducted in her home.

Under suspicion

Investigators of Police Department No. 1 of the Mukachevo District Police Department, with operational support from the Zakarpattia Directorate of the Department of Internal Security of the National Police of Ukraine, exposed an illegal scheme assisting in the issuance of international passports. A chief specialist of the Tiachiv department of the State Migration Service and two civilians are involved in the crime.

According to the investigation, artificial obstacles were created in the territorial office for the timely issuance of documents, and the 40-year-old employee decided to organize a scheme of “assistance” to citizens bypassing the established procedure — for monetary compensation.

During investigative actions, police conducted court-authorized searches in the homes of the suspects as well as in the office premises of the migration service. As a result, the seal of the head of the state institution was seized. Law enforcement officers are also checking the possible involvement of the head of the unit himself. Searches were conducted at his place of residence.

During the search, weapons and ammunition were discovered and seized. The material evidence was sent for expert examination.

Investigators, under the procedural supervision of the Mukachevo District Prosecutor’s Office, notified the migration service employee of suspicion under Part 3 of Article 368 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine — receiving an unlawful benefit by an official combined with extortion.

The pre-trial investigation is ongoing.

Read us on Telegram and Sends