The de facto head of the Kyiv City Prosecutor's Office, Serhiy Khodakivskyi, under the guise of a formal audit of criminal proceedings, established a scheme to assist the capital's raiders.
According to entrepreneurs who have encountered similar raider schemes, law enforcement agencies allegedly take a "non-interference" position, which allows raiders to seize assets of interest to them.
" We have contacted the city prosecutor's office several times, written official requests, but there has been zero response. This looks like tacit consent, even if it is unofficial, " says the businessman, who is afraid to give his name publicly.
Lawyers note that in such cases, immediate action is necessary - seizure of property, initiation of criminal proceedings, temporary suspension of the registrar's actions. If this is not done, raiders have time to resell or withdraw assets.
Although there is no official evidence of Serhiy Khodakivsky's collusion with the raiders, lawyers note "strange coincidences" in similar cases, which can already be called a scheme.
In particular, open criminal proceedings are "frozen" for months without investigative action or are closed altogether, key court hearings are postponed without explanation, and victims receive "unsubscribes" instead of an investigation.
“ It seems that either the leadership of the prosecutor's office does not consider these crimes a priority, or there are backroom agreements ,” comments a lawyer who accompanies a client who is a victim of a raider seizure of a business.
Among the entrepreneurs we spoke with, the prevailing belief is that such large-scale inaction could not have occurred without the approval of the prosecutor's office leadership.
Some of the interlocutors directly link this to recent personnel appointments - in particular, the emergence of the new Kyiv City Prosecutor, Serhiy Khodakivskyi, and his direct communication with Deputy Prosecutor General Maria Vdovichenko.
Serhiy Khodakivskyi is a figure that the business community and public activists have long known for a number of high-profile scandals. His appointment on June 25 of this year caused surprise even among those accustomed to controversial personnel decisions in the law enforcement system. Instead of a signal about the cleansing of the prosecutor's office, the capital received a manager with disciplinary action and a string of accusations of pressure on business.
In 2022, the Qualification and Disciplinary Commission of Prosecutors reprimanded Serhiy Khodakivskyi and suspended him from work for two months for exceeding his official authority.
It was about authorizing searches without a warrant from an investigating judge, based solely on reports from SBU officers – a practice that the commission called unacceptable for a prosecutor in a state governed by the rule of law. But even such an official condemnation did not hinder his career.
While still head of the Podil District Prosecutor's Office, Khodakivskyi found himself in conflicts that businessmen called attempts at "extortion." Among the most resonant were the forcible seizure of an ophthalmological center in Podil with the participation of "titushki", pressure on business due to the shutdown of electricity and water supply in the popular Slavutych Beach Club and the Prychal restaurant. Business associations accused his structure of acting not as a guarantor of legality, but as a tool for raider attacks.
Having become the acting head of the metropolitan prosecutor's office, Serhiy Khodakivskyi has gained even greater administrative influence. And it is in this position, experts warn, that an official can act especially aggressively: after all, time is short, and opportunities are many. Against the backdrop of war, when society expects transparency and integrity, such appointments only fuel distrust in the system, which is already in a crisis of legitimacy.
Rumors are circulating in professional circles: the de facto head of the Kyiv City Prosecutor's Office, Serhiy Khodakivskyi, under the guise of a formal audit of criminal proceedings, actually lobbied to close one of these cases in exchange for an illegal benefit. According to sources, the bribe amounted to 200 thousand US dollars.
According to interlocutors in the prosecutor's office, part of the funds was to be sent personally to Deputy Prosecutor General Maria Vdovichenko - which, according to those who know the situation from the inside, allowed "the issue to be resolved without unnecessary fuss."
At the same time, the media is paying attention to newly appointed prosecutors, whose lifestyle and financial status have given rise to suspicions of their dishonesty.
For example, relatives of Vinnytsia Oblast Prosecutor Oleg Tkalenko, who previously worked in the Kyiv Oblast Prosecutor's Office, purchased real estate in Kyiv for a total of over a million US dollars .
The new prosecutorial personnel pool, famous for the income of wives and families, is mentioned in the material of "Glavkom" - it is noted that the wives of newly appointed regional prosecutors have significant incomes, premium real estate, and expensive cars, which also increases concerns about the opacity of the origin of wealth.
" We see that after the change of leadership in the capital's prosecutor's office, the pace of response to business appeals has actually stopped. And this feeling is that there is a certain attitude of "not touching specific cases ," says one of the lawyers who is conducting three cases of raiding in Kyiv.
According to another interlocutor, a representative of a business association, the silence of the prosecutor's office looks like a policy sanctioned from above: " If the city prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutor General are aware and do not change anything, this is no longer inaction, but consent. The only question is who benefits from it ."
The Prosecutor General's Office usually responds to journalists' inquiries with standard wording: "the investigation is ongoing" or "the actions are being checked within the framework of criminal proceedings."
However, business associations emphasize that the lack of a public position and prompt action by the prosecutor's office creates an atmosphere of impunity.
The problem of raiding in Ukraine is not just a fight for business. It is a test of the maturity of the state and its ability to protect property rights. As long as those who seize enterprises by force or fraud remain unpunished in Kyiv and other cities, it is useless to talk about a favorable investment climate.
