Corruption case against ousted cyber chief is ‘revenge,’ Ukraine’s security service says

Ukraine’s security service (SBU) is accusing the country’s anti-corruption agencies of seeking “revenge” by bringing charges against the former head of the agency’s cybersecurity unit.

On Tuesday, the country’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP) announced a “suspicion” — a formal criminal charge under Ukrainian law and the first step in criminal proceedings — against ousted cyber official Illia Vitiuk. 

In a statement following the announcement, the SBU claimed the anti-corruption offices were prosecuting Vitiuk in retaliation for the security service’s detention of several NABU employees earlier this summer.

Vitiuk is a well-known figure in Ukraine’s cybersecurity community who has spoken at international conferences and given interviews to media outlets around the world. He was formally dismissed from his post last May after an earlier probe into his finances. Investigative journalists reported that his family’s real estate holdings exceeded their official salaries.

“The suspicion announced against Vitiuk is an act of revenge for our effective counteraction to Russian influence in government institutions and for exposing several NABU employees for committing crimes,” the SBU said.

In July, the security service detained a senior NABU detective on suspicion of aiding Russia. NABU said Ukrainian law enforcement also searched the homes of at least 15 of its employees at the time, and claimed that the raids were conducted without court warrants, while three of its detectives were subjected to “excessive physical force.”

NABU said on Tuesday that in December 2023 Vitiuk’s family bought a Kyiv apartment for $535,000 but reported it at nearly half that price. His wife claimed the funds came from legal and consulting work, but NABU reportedly found that payments were made by a man accused of embezzling from the state railway and related companies. Investigators said there was no proof Vitiuk’s wife provided any services to him and that the companies involved appeared to be fictitious.

Vitiuk is suspected of illicit enrichment — when an official’s assets far exceed legitimate income — and of filing false asset declarations, which require officials to publicly disclose their wealth.

SBU’s claims

The SBU claimed the case is politically motivated, noting that charges against Vitiuk were brought only after NABU officials were detained, and said investigators at NABU and SAP had failed to present convincing evidence to support the allegations against Vitiuk.

“There are strong grounds to speak of selective justice by NABU and SAP against an SBU officer,” the SBU claimed.

Vitaliy Shabunin, head of Ukraine’s leading anti-corruption nonprofit, cast doubt on the legitimacy of the SBU’s claims. He said journalists had revealed Vitiuk’s luxury real estate a year-and-a-half ago and that NABU has been investigating the case ever since. The suspicion against the former cyber chief was prepared before the agency raided NABU detectives’ apartments, he added.

Anna Babinets, editor-in-chief of the Slidstvo.Info investigative outlet, also cast doubt on the SBU’s defense. 

“I’ve never read such lengthy institutional praise for an official formally suspected of illicit enrichment,” she said. Slidstvo.Info was the first outlet to report on Vitiuk’s alleged corruption.

The SBU pointed to a report by the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), which said it found no evidence of Vitiuk’s illicit enrichment and concluded the apartment was legally purchased with his wife’s declared business income. 

But according to a Ukrainian anti-corruption expert who spoke to Recorded Future News on condition of anonymity, the NACP doesn’t have investigative powers and can’t verify whether the money sent to Vitiuk’s wife was actually payment for real work. NABU believes she didn’t provide legal services, yet still received money from a suspect in a major embezzlement case.

“The only surprising thing is why the NACP didn’t establish the real market value of the apartment registered to Vitiuk’s wife, since its actual value was much higher than what was stated in the purchase agreement,” the expert added.

He noted that while it’s unusual for law enforcement agencies to accuse anti-graft bodies of retaliation, it has happened in Ukraine before. In 2017, then-SBU deputy head Pavlo Demchyna accused an anti-corruption investigator of falsifying records after journalists reported that his partner owned luxury property and cars far beyond her income.

Vitiuk sparked controversy when it was reported that he sought to have the journalist behind the investigation drafted into the army. According to local media reports at the time, officers from the enlistment office, alongside an official from Vitiuk’s SBU department, approached the reporter in a Kyiv shopping center and accused him of evading military service. 

Vitiuk has not commented on his case and has reportedly been reassigned to combat duty, leaving Kyiv for the frontline. His current whereabouts are unknown. 

He is not the first Ukrainian cyber official suspected of financial abuse. In November, two high-ranking cybersecurity officials in Ukraine were dismissed amid an investigation into suspected embezzlement of state funds. They are suspected of involvement in a software procurement scheme in which they allegedly embezzled $1.72 million between 2020 and 2022.