RSS
Логотип
Баннер в шапке 1
Баннер в шапке 2

Content

Vityuk Ilya Anatolyevich
Vityuk Ilya Anatolyevich

Biography

2025: Detention on charges of illegal enrichment through real estate

In early September 2025, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) charged the former head of the cybersecurity department of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), Brigadier General Ilya Vityuk. He is suspected of illegal enrichment and unreliable declaration.

According to the case file, Vityuk purchased an apartment in Kyiv for $522 thousand, although under the agreement its cost was indicated in the amount of $309 thousand. Ukrainian media in the spring of 2024 also reported on the capital's apartment, decorated for Vityuk's wife. After the rising hype, Vityuk was removed from the post of head of the cybersecurity department of the SBU. The charges were brought against the general by NABU and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAP) after almost two years of investigation.

File:Aquote1.png
According to the investigation, in December 2023, the suspect purchased an apartment for 21.6 million hryvnia and issued it for a family member. At the same time, under the agreement, its cost is 12.8 million hryvnia, - said the press service of the SAP.
File:Aquote2.png

On September 4, 2025, the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court of Ukraine chose a preventive measure for Vityuk in the form of a pledge in the amount of 9 million 84 thousand hryvnia (about $238 thousand at the exchange rate as of the specified date). Publication "Public. News "notes that Vityuk, according to the court order, is obliged to hand over documents to travel abroad, arrive at the request of NABU and report on the change of his place of residence.

At the same time, Vityuk's defense insists that the prosecution did not take into account a number of important facts in its conclusion. In particular, in correspondence on the purchase of an apartment, the realtor herself indicated that at the time of the transaction, the cost per square meter of housing of a comparable level was about $2000, and not $3000 or "even more, as the prosecution says."[1]

Notes