On 24 August 2026, at the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC), during a hearing on the choice of a preventive measure for Iryna Mudra, the former deputy head of the Office of the President, a statement was made by Yonatan Markovich, the Chief Rabbi of Kyiv. The religious leader informed the court of his readiness to act as a personal surety for the suspect. According to him, he has known Mudra for "many years" and characterizes her in a positive light, stating that she "came for prayers and religious matters" and that, in his belief, she "will let down neither the community nor the state and all its institutions." The statement was made against the backdrop of the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAP) prosecutor's office reading out the materials of the criminal case, which made the course of the hearing one of the most discussed in the public sphere.
The Essence of the Statement and the Legal Meaning of Surety
Under Article 180 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, personal surety is one of the preventive measures: reputable persons undertake in writing to guarantee that the suspect will comply with procedural obligations, in particular appearing in court and not evading the investigation. According to legal experts, the involvement of a public figure of such stature is intended to ensure that the court takes informal guarantees into account alongside the formal grounds for choosing a preventive measure. For the defense, this is a way to offer an alternative to more stringent measures, which, according to the prosecutor's office, involved a bail of a substantial amount.
The Context of the Case and the Prosecutor's Position
According to the SAP prosecutor's office, within the framework of the case, in which, in particular, Kyiv developers Maksym Mykytas and Vadym Stolar are named, audio recordings were read out on which, according to the investigation, undeclared funds and large cash sums are discussed. The prosecutor's office also refers to materials on the legalization of income through banking structures. The defense and the sureties, in turn, emphasize the presumption of innocence and point out that the incriminating characterizations are not a fact established by the court until the verdict enters into legal force.
Contradictory Data
In the public space, two sharply contrasting characterizations of the defendant's conduct coexist. On the one hand, the Chief Rabbi of Kyiv, in his statement, describes Iryna Mudra as a person who "came for prayers" and who, in his words, "will not let the state down." On the other hand, the SAP prosecutor's office, reading out the case materials, cites recordings on which, according to the investigation, undeclared funds and the need to "systematize" certain processes are discussed. These two versions do not coincide in content, and the final assessment of whether the actions of the accused correspond to the facts will be given by the court within the framework of the case proceedings. The differences in the amounts mentioned in different contexts (including in millions of hryvnia and in millions of dollars) are also linked to the fact that they refer to different episodes and periods recorded in the case materials.
The Court's Expected Decision
HACC practice shows that the presence of sureties, including public and religious figures, is not an automatic guarantee of a lenient preventive measure being chosen: courts have previously decided to impose more stringent measures regardless of the number of sureties. The final decision in the case of Iryna Mudra is expected at the hearing on 25 August 2026. Until it is announced, all characterizations by the parties remain positions within the court proceedings, not established facts.
