“Former Deputy Prosecutor General of Ukraine Dmitry Verbitsky, who is suspected of illegal enrichment, filed a lawsuit against the National Agency for Prevention of Corruption (NAPC), which found unreasonable assets for almost UAH 29 million. The purpose of the claim is to challenge the findings of the anti -corruption body and to protect honor and dignity. On May 1, 2025, the Pechersk District Court of Kiev had”, – WRITE ON: ua.news
Former Deputy Prosecutor General of Ukraine Dmitry Verbitsky, who is suspected of illegal enrichment, filed a lawsuit against the National Agency for Prevention of Corruption (NAPC), which found unreasonable assets for almost UAH 29 million. The purpose of the claim is to challenge the findings of the anti -corruption body and to protect honor and dignity.
On May 1, 2025, the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv was to begin the consideration of this resonant claim. However, the unexpected hearing was canceled.
We consider the basis of Verbitsky’s case, the essence of the accusations, the chronology of key events and the course of the trial.
Verbitsky’s lawsuit against NAPC
Dmitry Verbitsky declared his intention to sue NAPC in November 2024. On March 6, 2025, information that he had already filed an appropriate lawsuit with the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv.
On May 1, 2025 in the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv It should take place meetings on the claim of Dmitry Verbitsky against the National Agency for Corruption Prevention (NACC). In his lawsuit, the ex-deputy prosecutor’s deputy demands the protection of his honor and dignity. He believes that the NAPC’s conclusions about his illegal enrichment have caused damage to his reputation.
It was the NAPC’s conclusions that became the starting point for investigating the National Anti -Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) for possible illegal enrichment of Verbitsky for almost UAH 29 million. These conclusions also led to his release from the Office of the Prosecutor General.
However, scheduled for May 1, 2025 did not happen. The reasons for the cancellation or postponement of the meeting are unknown. The date of the next hearing is also. The judge’s secretary refused to provide information to journalists because they are not participants in the trial.
Verbitsky himself did not appear in the court building, only his lawyer came.
Representatives of the media tried to communicate with the lawyer of ex-deputy prosecutor. However, the defender reported that his client did not consent to the comment.
UA.News media will continue to follow the Verbitsky’s trial against NAPC. After all, the case is directly related to the likely corruption at a high level.
What is the accused of Dmitry Verbitsky
Basic charges against Dmitry Verbitsky are based on Conclusions National Agency for Prevention of Corruption (NAPC), which found signs of acquiring unreasonable assets in the amount of about UAH 29 million.
In particular, NAPC points to such assets whose sources of origin cause doubts and do not meet the official income of Verbitsky and related persons:
- The elite house in the cottage “Konik” near Kiev. This house was purchased by Christina Ilnitskaya, a girl of Verbitsky, during their relationship. The value of the property is much exceeding the official income of Ilnitskaya, which raises the lawfulness of sources of financing. The fact that Verbitsky himself lived in the same town increases suspicions of his involvement in this purchase. According to the NAPC, the cost of the house and land is 16.3 million UAH.
- In addition, NAPC found in Verbitsky house And the land in Odessa worth 10 million hryvnias.
- Apartment and land in Turkey worth 3.9 million UAH. By data journalists, real estate is located in an elite residential complex on the first line of the Mediterranean.
- Luxury cars. The ownership of the girl of Christina Ilnitskaya is expensive cars of Lexus (ES 300h models worth more than UAH 960 thousand and NX 300h worth more than UAH 480 thousand) and Porsche Macan T worth 3.5 million UAH. NAPC believes that these vehicles were purchased on behalf of Verbitsky at his expense, acquired by illegally.
According to the NAPC, all these assets were acquired on behalf of Dmitry Verbitsky by persons who have a connection with him. The agency believes that the value of these assets far exceeds the legal income of the former Deputy Prosecutor General and related persons. This was the basis for the conclusion that their unreasonableness and further criminal proceedings opened by NABU.
In addition, journalists also expressed suspicion of possible involvement Verbitsky and his former chief, Prosecutor General Andrei Kostin to illegal schemes in the Maritime Commercial Port “Southern”.
Criminal Case against Verbitsky: Chronology
Information on possible facts of illegal enrichment of Dmitry Verbitsky was first published in journalistic investigations in May 2024. The investigation was about Verbitsky’s residence in Townhous in the elite Kiev cottage Konik.
Photo: a cottage town of grasshopper
This house has purchased his nephew at a significantly low price. Subsequently, in June 2024, another investigation dedicated to the property of the girl of the Deputy Prosecutor General Christina Ilnitskaya, whose value also raised the question of the legality of sources of origin.
Photo: Christina Ilnitskaya, Verbitsky’s mistress
July 3, 2024 National Anti -Corruption Agency (NAPC) stated On identification of signs of acquisition for a former deputy prosecutor of unreasonable assets worth about UAH 29 million.
May 13, 2024 National Anti -Corruption Bureau of Ukraine opened Criminal proceedings against Dmitry Verbitsky. The basis for the beginning of the investigation was the conclusions of the NAPC on the signs of unreasonable assets for 29 million hryvnias, as well as the publication of journalistic investigations, which covered the possible facts of its illegal enrichment.
According to the Specialized Anti -Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP), two cases are being investigated against Verbitsky. The prosecutor’s office does not consider the option of filing a civil claim for confiscation of property of ex-deputy prosecutor. The fact is that the amount of the wrongful asset checked by the pre -trial investigation exceeds the threshold of civil liability. And if the prosecutor’s office goes to court with a civil lawsuit, it will actually protect Verbitsky from criminal responsibility and only recover his assets into the income of the state.
The media appeared in the media that Verbitsky is through court tries to press on NABU detectives and SAP prosecutors.
The official investigation and release of Verbitsky from the prosecutor’s office
On June 18, 2024, the People’s Deputies of Ukraine summoned the Prosecutor General Andriy Kostin to the Verkhovna Rada to provide explanations of everywhere about the origin of his deputy Dmitry Verbitsky. However, prosecutor general call to parliament ignored.
The next day MP Yaroslav Zheleznyak Published Letter of Prosecutor General Kostin to the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada. In a letter, Kostin explained the reasons for his absence at a parliamentary meeting. He said that due to the investigation started and other checks, it is advisable to postpone the discussion of the Verbitsky case in the Council before obtaining the results of the investigation to ensure the completeness and objectivity of the information.
Photo: Prosecutor General Kostina’s letter to the Verkhovna Rada Chairman
Therefore, the official investigation into the possible violations related to Dmitry Verbitsky’s property condition was initiated on June 19, 2024.
Prosecutor General Andriy Kostin tried to defend his deputy Verbitsky in every possible way. He indicated that he listened to the explanation of Verbitsky, who believed that his removal is favorably involved in the resonant cases he conducted and emphasized the need for weighted and objective decisions in this situation.
However, due to public resonance on June 21, 2024, the Prosecutor General is temporarily put it Dmitry Verbitsky’s duties to other deputies. Why didn’t Verbitsky release? The Prosecutor General insisted that the law does not imply the possibility of release of the prosecutor at the stage of investigation.
July 1, 2024 Andrei Kostin signed Order on dismissal at his own request from the administrative position of the Deputy Prosecutor General Dmitry Verbitsky. It should be noted that Verbitsky continued to work in the prosecutor’s office afterwards.
The official investigation was completed after the final release of Dmitry Verbitsky from the prosecutor’s office in October 2024. Prosecutor General Andriy Kostin said that the results of the official investigation were transferred to the National Anti -Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), in accordance with the request of a detective investigating the probable illegal enrichment of Verbitsky.
However, the conclusions of the official investigation were not publicly published. The Prosecutor General did not inform what violations the official checks came to. Thus, specific conclusions and recommendations of official investigations remained unknown to the general public, and the further evaluation of Verbitsky’s actions and the establishment of truth in the case was within the competence of pre -trial investigation bodies.
Verbitsky October 8 2024 filed a statement about dismissal from the prosecutor’s office at their own request. The Prosecutor General Andriy Kostin signed an appropriate order on his release on the same day. Thus, after temporary removal, Verbitsky finally lost his post in the office of the Attorney General.
In the same month, the Prosecutor General himself was dismissed. October 22 he filed resign. October 29, 2024 Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine supported The resignation of Andrei Kostin. And on October 31 President Volodymyr Zelenskyy signed a corresponding decree on his release.
The release of Kostin was a result of a number of factors, among which a key role played a scandal with illegal design of disability Prosecutors of Khmelnytsky region. Subsequently They found out The huge scale of such fictitious disabilities in prosecutors and officials throughout Ukraine. President He stressedThe Attorney General should be responsible for this situation.