Sent to Pretrial Detention: What Is Known About the Case of Iryna Mudra and Her Influence on Judges
The High Anti-Corruption Court remanded Iryna Mudra, the former deputy head of the Office of the President, to pretrial detention. According to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU), she was the one who repeated a quote from an unidentified supervisor: “Corruption must be systematized and controlled.” The High Anti-Corruption Court ordered her detention for 60 days, with the option to post bail of 20 million hryvnias, although the prosecutor had requested 150 million hryvnias.
The court considered a preventive measure for the former deputy head of the Presidential Office during three court sessions: on August 21, 24, and 25. Representatives of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) mostly cited excerpts from conversations already known to the public, which were recorded during the “Forest Gump” and “Themis” special operations. However, some new details also emerged regarding the possible extent of the former Presidential Office official’s wealth and the influence exerted on the courts by a criminal group in which, according to the SAP, Iryna Mudra was involved.
The disclosed episodes gave the impression that those suspected of high-level corruption have nearly limitless opportunities and resources to evade accountability.
For details on the proceedings of the High Anti-Corruption Court, the exposed system of high-level abuses, and Iryna Mudra’s likely personal influence on the courts—see the UA.News overview.
Why the SAPO sought Mudra’s
arrest
In its motion to the High Anti-Corruption Court, the SAPO prosecutor cited risks that could affect the further course of Iryna Mudra’s case. The prosecution argued that the former deputy head of the Office of the President has a network of contacts extensive enough to enable her to flee abroad. Therefore, it insisted on her arrest or the imposition of a 150 million hryvnia bail.
In addition, the SAP fears that those involved in the case may destroy the remaining evidence. The prosecutor read aloud several excerpts from Mudra’s conversations with former MP Maksym Mykytas, which indicated that, having learned of the anti-corruption agencies’ interest in the case, the suspects had already attempted to hide valuable items and documents. Specifically, the following conversations were recorded on May 28 and 30, 2026:
“Mudra: So what should I do? Should I not bring my things? Mykitas: Well, of course, bring them. I’m always waiting for you. Mudra: Well, no, I mean, should I bring that suitcase with all the jewelry in it?”
“Mudra: Okay, I took the suitcase with my things. Mykitas: And you came to Mykitas. Mudra: I came to Mykitas. Mykitas: To hide.”
The prosecutor also stated that the suspects received information from several sources about covert investigative activities and tried to protect themselves by checking their apartments for wiretaps.
Cartier, a shekel account, and $4 million from Mykyta
The prosecution argued that the former deputy head of the Office of the President possesses a fortune worth millions and is therefore able to pay bail of 150 million hryvnia. To support this, the prosecutor read aloud information from Iryna Mudra’s asset declaration, as well as details about property and funds discovered during the searches.
According to the prosecutor, Mudra owns an apartment with an area of over 57 square meters, the value of which may exceed 8 million hryvnias, a parking space, and an unfinished construction project.
The prosecution found valuable jewelry in the suspect’s possession: a diamond ring, a Cartier bracelet, and an expensive wristwatch, as well as securities and funds in accounts denominated in dollars, euros, hryvnias, and shekels. According to the prosecutor, some of the jewelry found had not been declared. Based on conversations recorded as part of the wiretap operation, investigators also concluded that Mudra owns a Range Rover worth 120,000 euros, as well as proceeds from the sale of an apartment in 2026.
Of particular note is a recorded conversation between Mudra and former MP Maksym Mykyta, during which he said he had left Mudra “almost $4 million regarding Ukrbud.”
“In a conversation dated January 8, 2026, between Mykytas and Ms. Mudra, the following exchange took place: Mykytas: ‘Hey, why are you so grumpy? Damn it, I left you almost $4 million. Why are you so grumpy?’ Regarding ‘Ukrbud.’ Mudra: ‘And what did you leave me?’ Mykitas: ‘What did I leave you?’” the SAPO prosecutor quoted from the recording, noting that the former official did not declare these funds in her financial disclosure statement.
In addition, the prosecutor read a recording of a conversation indicating that Mudra received $20,000 of unknown origin every month, in addition to her salary. It appears this amount has increased—in January 2026, the former official allegedly mentions in a conversation that, in addition to her official income, she had already received $30,000.
Furthermore, according to the investigation’s findings, Mudra “intended to distribute the money to other officials,” including Viktor Dubovyk, the Director General for Legal Affairs at the Office of the President.
“All of this indicates that Ms. Mudra has officially declared tens of millions of hryvnias, and, when combined with the matters under discussion, there are grounds to assert that Ms. Mudra may have assets at her disposal in the form of securities, jewelry, vehicles, real estate, and property rights totaling more than 250 million, and therefore we are requesting bail in the amount of 150 million hryvnias,” the SAPO prosecutor concluded.
Judges Under Control: What the NABU
Recordings Reveal
News of the millions in assets held by those suspected of corruption rarely surprises anyone anymore, but the potential extent of these individuals’ influence on the judicial system is truly staggering. In the recorded conversations, according to the prosecutor, “Ms. Mudra herself effectively confirms the ability to influence judicial practice.”
Perhaps the most telling episode, which characterizes the relationships within the “hierarchy” at the highest levels of power, concerned the “selection” of judges for senior positions. In one of the quoted conversations between Mykytas and Mudra, the following exchange took place: “Mykytas says: I told you what to do. He’s ready to come to you and bow to you again, get down on his knees—he’s even ready… Why did I ask you to call him in so he could swear his loyalty to you once more?”
The SAPO prosecutor explained: the point is that one of the judges intended to be transferred to a higher court, and Ms. Mudra intended to facilitate this transfer. Further excerpts from the NABU recordings also confirm that the individuals involved, including Iryna Mudra, were promoting judges who were part of a coordinated scheme.
“Mykitas: She’s just releasing them from the pool by Tuesday—she’s just doing it that way. She says, ‘I can’t just release one from the pool, so to speak.’ Mykitas: She’s holding about 30 people,” the prosecutor quoted from the recordings.
Another recorded conversation between Mykytas and Mudra on April 19, 2026, according to the prosecution, may indicate the defendants’ influence at the Supreme Court level.
“Mudra says: ‘And I want (the surname of a Supreme Court justice is mentioned) to look into this from the Supreme Court’s perspective—what else is needed to hold our ground later… Well, look, I did him a huge favor.’”
The prosecutor explained that this implies a certain judge is indebted to Iryna Romanivna and still needs to refine the legal position in the case. He also noted that he had cited only select conversations intended to confirm the high risk of the defendants influencing the courts in their own interests.
Mudra’s Defense: The Statement About Corruption Was Misinterpreted
The defense team for Iryna Mudra, the former deputy head of the Presidential Office, asked the court not to impose a pretrial restraint on her. During the hearing, two people vouched for her, including the Chief Rabbi of Kyiv, Yonatan Binyamin Markovich. In the courtroom, he explained that he and Mudra have known each other for several years: she visited the community to “pray and stay in touch with the Almighty.”
The defense first argued that the phrase attributed to Mudra—“Corruption must be controlled”—had been misinterpreted by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU). In fact, the defendant meant that “corruption must be controlled through the creation of anti-corruption bodies.”
The attorneys also insisted that the evidence was insufficient. In her closing statement, Iryna Mudra herself asserted that former MP Maksym Mykytas had not given her any “$4 million” mentioned in the NABU recordings. She stated that she had never received $4 million from Maksym Mykytas—neither in cash, nor into a bank account, nor in any other form. She argued that there is also no evidence in the case file confirming the transfer of these funds. In addition, the defense attorneys argued that Mudra herself is almost a victim, since the published conversations reveal “pressure” and “coercion” on her part from Mykytas.
Regarding the episode involving the collection of a 150 million hryvnia bail for former Minister Herman Galushchenko, who was arrested in connection with the “Midas” case, the defense also stated that there is insufficient evidence of Mudra’s involvement.
“The indictment does not even name the person from whom, according to the prosecution, the proposal came. That person is simply referred to as an ‘official.’ This phrasing is repeated dozens of times in the episode; in other words, the key figure is not named, has not been identified, and there is no evidence. Furthermore, the entire sequence of financial transactions described in the episode was not carried out by Mudra, but—according to the prosecution’s own version—by entirely different individuals,” the defense noted.
The attorneys emphasized that the SAPO does not cite a single payment document signed directly by Mudra herself.
The High Anti-Corruption Court’s
Decision and the 20 Million Hryvnia
Bail
After three court hearings, on August 25, Investigating Judge Ihor Strohyi announced the decision: “The motion is granted in part. The suspect is to be subject to a preventive measure in the form of pretrial detention for a period of 60 days. Set bail for Iryna Romanivna Mudriy at 20 million hryvnias.”
The judge explained that if bail is posted, the suspect must comply with the following procedural obligations:
She must appear whenever summoned by detectives and prosecutors.
Not to leave Kyiv or the Kyiv region without the detective’s permission.
Report any change of residence.
Iryna Mudra is also required to refrain from communicating with witnesses and victims.
“Refrain from visiting any premises owned or used by Budmontazhservice LLC, Filosofiya Development LLC, and Regional Resources LLC. She must surrender for safekeeping … her passport, travel documents, and other documents granting her the right to leave Ukraine. She must wear an electronic monitoring device,” said the investigating judge.
Iryna Mudra herself appears to have readily accepted the High Anti-Corruption Court’s decision and is confident that she will find 20 million hryvnias to post bail for her release from custody.
“Over the course of my 51 years, I’ve built up a lot of contacts,” said Mudra.
According to her, she has some of the funds herself, and will seek the rest from acquaintances and friends. Mudra also stated that her attorneys will assess the legal grounds for the court’s decision and, if necessary, file an appeal.
The Case of Iryna Mudra
Iryna Mudra had served as deputy head of the Office of the President since March 2024 and was dismissed on August 19, 2026. On the same day, investigators from NABU and the SAP conducted searches at the former official’s residence and informed her that she was suspected of participating in a criminal organization as part of the “Forest Gump” special operation.
According to NABU and the SAP, members of the organization planned to carry out a hostile takeover of two companies and a building in central Kyiv by forging documents. NABU suspects that Iryna Mudra, while serving in the Office of the President, may have helped carry out these plans.
In addition, investigators believe that the suspects laundered 150 million hryvnias in cash through the state-owned Sens Bank to use it as bail for former Energy Minister Herman Halushchenko, who is implicated in the “Midas” case concerning embezzlement at Energoatom. According to NABU and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), accounts of controlled companies and the state-owned Sens Bank were used for this purpose.
Certain questions regarding Iryna Mudra’s activities have arisen in connection with the IBOX Bank case.
According to UA.News, during the investigation into the IBOX Bank case, Iryna Mudra personally called judges and told them exactly what decisions were expected of them in specific proceedings.
At that time, she was already the deputy head of the Office of the President and was responsible for legal matters at the highest level of government.
The timeline of court decisions in the proceedings surrounding IBOX Bank also raises questions for the defense.
One of the key figures in this story is Volodymyr Marmash, a judge of the Lychakiv District Court of Lviv. UA.News has already reported on this judge on multiple occasions, as well as on the rulings he has issued in criminal cases.
Specifically, on November 16, 2023, Volodymyr Marmash considered a motion to extend the pretrial investigation period to six months. This was preceded by a change in jurisdiction on the very day that the Pechersk District Court in Kyiv was scheduled to hear appeals against rulings to suspend the investigation.
On June 14, 2024, the judge granted a motion to remand Iryna Tsyganok in custody in absentia. The defense argued that there were no proper grounds for suspicion, an international arrest warrant, or a proper summons.
In October 2024, Marmash also denied Alona Shevtsova’s complaint regarding the orders to suspend the investigation. However, on November 5, another court ruling overturned those orders.
On March 13, 2025, Marmash authorized a special pretrial investigation. The defense argued that the decision had been made after the investigative deadline had passed and without sufficient evidence to justify an international arrest warrant.
Another incident occurred on May 8, 2025. The defense was given only until June 27 to review approximately 50 volumes of case files and about 100,000 pages of bank statements.
After a lengthy investigation and legal proceedings, on July 29, 2025, the Holosiivskyi District Court of Kyiv dismissed the criminal case against Alona Shevtsova, Iryna Tsyganok, and Zoia Nesterovska due to the expiration of the pretrial investigation period, and on October 2, the Kyiv Court of Appeals upheld this decision.
The court also lifted the seizures of IBOX Bank’s assets that had been imposed as part of these proceedings.
