Searches in the Verkhovna Rada: what is actually known about the new NABU and SAP anti-corruption case and where the line lies between facts and rumors
The end of December 2025 brought one of the loudest signals in the field of anti-corruption policy of the entire year. The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office officially reported the exposure of an organized criminal group that included acting Members of Parliament of Ukraine. According to investigators, it concerns the systematic receipt of undue benefits for voting in the Verkhovna Rada.
This wording sounds as tough as possible. And not by chance. It means not an isolated episode, not a “mistake of one MP”, but a stable scheme which, according to the investigation, operated for a long time and was embedded directly into parliamentary processes.
What is officially confirmed
Let us start with what is publicly confirmed and undisputed.
NABU and SAP stated in a joint announcement that:
- an organized criminal group was exposed;
- it included acting Members of Parliament;
- MPs received undue benefits for voting in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine;
- the operation involved undercover actions;
- details of the case will be disclosed later.
This is an important point. Law enforcement agencies deliberately did not name individuals, limiting themselves to the general framework of the case. Such practice is typical at the stage of active investigative actions, when publicity may harm evidence gathering or future procedural decisions.
Searches in parliament and the conflict with the State Guard
The second block of confirmed facts concerns searches and obstruction of investigative actions.
According to NABU, detectives were obstructed by officers of the State Guard Department, who restricted access to the government quarter from the European Square side. The Bureau directly stated that such actions constitute a violation of the law.
Only after public disclosure and intervention by leadership was access granted to detectives.
At the same time, independent media, including Suspilne, confirmed:
- searches in the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Transport and Infrastructure;
- investigative actions conducted in premises related to parliamentary activity.
This is crucial. This is not about private apartments or random offices, but about the institutional core of state power.
Parkovy Convention Center and what should not be exaggerated
Separate public resonance was caused by reports of searches at the Parkovy Convention and Exhibition Center, where the headquarters of the Servant of the People party is located.
Here the situation is more complex and requires caution.
Journalists indeed reported investigative actions in the building. At the same time, MP Yaroslav Zhelezniak clearly explained: the Parkovy Center is a large business complex, and conducting searches there does not automatically mean searches in the party office itself. According to him, detectives were not present in the Servant of the People office.
This clarification removes part of the political manipulation around the topic.
Names of MPs: what the media say and what NABU did not say
The most sensitive part of the case is the names of possible suspects.
According to ZN.UA, citing sources in law enforcement agencies and the Servant of the People faction, Yevhen Pivovarov, Ihor Nehulevskyi, and Yurii Kisel received suspicions. All three are suspected under Article 368 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine receipt of undue benefit by an official.
According to sources, court rulings also mention:
- Article 255 – participation in a criminal organization;
- Article 369 – offering or giving an undue benefit.
This is a serious set of articles indicating the investigators’ attempt to qualify the case as an organized system, not isolated agreements.
At the same time, it is important to record: NABU and SAP have not officially published the list of suspects. All information about specific names currently relies on journalistic sources, not official law enforcement press releases.
Koriavchenkov: the biggest confusion
The story involving Yurii Koriavchenkov deserves separate attention.
NABU officially stated that no searches were conducted at his place. According to sources of Ukrainska Pravda, he was not notified of suspicion.
Information about his departure from Ukraine is contradictory. Some sources claim he left the country, others deny this. At this point, there is no official confirmation of his departure.
Post List
Why the Mindich case is mentioned and where the line is
In the public space, this case began to be linked to another high-profile NABU investigation the corruption scheme in Energoatom and Operation Midas, involving Tymur Mindich.
In fact:
- the case regarding MPs and the Energoatom case are different criminal proceedings;
- they are united only by scale and NABU’s approach to exposing systemic schemes;
- there is currently no confirmed evidence that these are one case or a single network.
Any merging of these cases into one narrative at this stage is media speculation, not a proven fact.
What this means for parliament and the state
This story is important not only because of names. It exposes the problem of trading votes as a systemic risk.
If the investigation proves that Members of Parliament:
- received money for voting;
- acted as part of an organized group;
- used committees as instruments of influence,
this will mean a crisis of trust in parliament as an institution, not merely a reputational blow to individual politicians.
So far, the case is at a stage where:
- some facts are officially confirmed;
- some are based on journalistic sources;
- some information is contradictory or requires further verification.
Time for Action at this point sees the key issue not only in the names, but in the outcome. Whether this case will reach court, verdicts, and real sentences. Because without this, even the loudest searches risk remaining just another episode of a loud but unfinished fight against corruption.
About the Author
Related posts:
Continuity of Local Government During Wartime: An Analysis of the Verkhovna Rada Resolution 
Restoring the Independence of NABU and SAPO: How Parliament and the President Responded to Pressure, Criticism, and Public Demand 
An Assault on Anti-Corruption Independence in Ukraine: What Draft Law No. 12414 Means 
Bill No. 12439 a challenge to the anti-corruption system or a “new level” of business protection?
