The Supreme Anti-Corruption Court has left unchanged the seizure of the property of Mykola Tyshchenko, a member of parliament from the Servant of the People party. This includes over $300,000, 150,000 euros, and an Audemars Piguet Royal Oak Off Shore luxury watch.
This decision was made as part of the NABU investigation into the possible illegal enrichment of the People's Deputy and lies in the declaration for 2022. Investigators believe that Tyshchenko did not declare assets in an amount that significantly exceeds his legal income - over 30 million hryvnias.
What was arrested?
The property was seized during searches of the homes of Tyshchenko himself and his ex-wife. In addition to the seized funds, the searches uncovered another $320,000 and over €240,000 that had been received by NABU from parallel proceedings by the State Bureau of Investigation.
The politician's defense tried to appeal the arrest, insisting that:
-
Tyshchenko was not informed about the meeting;
-
the searches were allegedly conducted without proper permits;
-
money and a watch are declared property;
-
The arrest is based solely on the investigator's assumptions.
In addition, the people's deputy's lawyers argued that the seized property was never seized by the State Bureau of Investigation, and therefore NABU had no right to use it in its proceedings.
Why did the court leave everything under arrest?
The NABU representative denied all the arguments of the defense. He noted that:
-
The searches were conducted on the basis of decisions of the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv;
-
Tishchenko received proper notice of the meeting, but did not appear;
-
The property has the status of tangible evidence, and its value does not correspond to the declared income of the people's deputy.
The court fully supported the investigation's position. The decision states that Tyshchenko's lifestyle, including regular trips abroad and expensive purchases, raises doubts about the legality of the origin of the funds.
The criminal proceedings concern Art. 366-2 (declaration of false information) and Art. 368-5 (illegal enrichment) of the Criminal Code. This is not the first time that Tyshchenko's name has appeared in corruption scandals. This time, as the documents show, the anti-corruption authorities are determined to bring the case to an end.
