During a court hearing at the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) on the selection of a preventive measure for the former deputy head of the Office of the President, Irina Mudraya, a prosecutor from the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAP) presented new details of the case, known as Operation "Forrest Gump." This is reported by RBC-Ukraine, citing the live broadcast of the hearing. According to the prosecution's representative, the defendants — Irina Mudraya and former Member of Parliament Maksym Mykityas — discussed significant amounts of shadow income that are absent from their official declarations, as well as methods for legitimizing expensive assets.
Shadow Income and Undeclared Assets
The SAP prosecutor stated that Mykityas and Mudraya discussed how to bring expensive assets into the legal circulation: a 2023 Land Rover Range Rover Sport, as well as jewelry from the brands Bulgari and Van Cleef. According to the prosecution's position, the defendants presumably considered the possibility of registering these assets in the names of close persons to conceal their origin. These statements were made as part of a motion for the application of a preventive measure and reflect the investigation's version, not a fact established by the court.
Sponsorship of the Daughter and a "Top-Up" to the Salary
The prosecutor paid particular attention to the financial flows around the Mudraya family. According to him, Mykityas undertook to sponsor the residence and education of the former deputy head of the Office of the President's daughter in the US, specifically referring to providing 250,000 dollars per year. The prosecution claims that the former MP repeated this commitment in several conversations with the defendant's daughter. In connection with this data, media outlets, citing case materials, point out that Mudraya did not declare more than 4 million dollars, and also mention a so-called "top-up" to the salary as a separate element of the financial scheme.
Conspiracy Amid Fear of Searches
The SAP prosecutor also drew the court's attention to the strict measures of conspiracy that the defendants resorted to out of fear of possible searches by the NABU. In particular, there was talk of destroying paper documents, deleting messages in messengers, as well as attempts to detect surveillance: the defendants, according to the prosecution's version, checked addresses for the conduct of covert investigative actions against them. These circumstances are used by both the defense and the prosecution to justify the risk of destruction of evidence and pressure on witnesses.
Connection to the "Midas" Case and Bail for Hlushchenko
The NABU and SAP Operation "Forrest Gump" concerns, according to the investigation, a scheme for legitimizing 150 million hryvnias, which were to be used to post bail for the former Minister of Energy, German Hlushchenko — a defendant in the "Midas" case. Law enforcement agencies believe that the money was routed through the accounts of controlled companies and a state bank to bring it into legal circulation. As part of the operation, there was also reporting on the activities of a criminal organization that may have included the former deputy head of the Office of the President, Irina Mudraya. The outcome of the prosecution's position was a motion for bail for Mudraya in the amount of 150 million hryvnias.
Contradictory Data
When comparing the versions of the parties and data from different sources, inconsistencies are visible in the aggregation of financial figures. On the one hand, the public domain features a total amount of undeclared funds of "more than 4 million dollars," as well as a separate "top-up" to the salary; on the other — during the hearing, specific items are detailed, such as 250,000 dollars per year for the daughter and the value of individual assets (the car, jewelry). A single reconciled statement in which these elements would add up to the final amount is not provided in open statements. Moreover, all the financial circumstances listed at this point are assertions by the prosecution, voiced during the motion for a preventive measure, and are not facts established by a court verdict. Until a corresponding decision is made, these figures should be considered as the prosecution's version.
Thus, the hearing at the HACC revealed a new layer of details in the "Forrest Gump" case, linking the former deputy head of the Office of the President with shadow financial flows and the "Midas" case. The final legal assessment of these circumstances, including the amount of bail and the qualification of the defendants' actions, will be left to the court.
