Abuse of millions: NABU and SAPO opened a case against ARMA head Maksymenko over Zakharchenko’s estate

Abuse of millions: NABU and SAPO opened a case against ARMA head Maksymenko over Zakharchenko’s estate

«Mindichgate» Moves to ARMA’s Sphere: How the State Lost Control Over Zakharchenko’s Mansion.

The scandal, known in the public domain as «Mindichgate», has progressed to a procedural level. The Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office has opened a criminal case against the acting head of ARMA, Yaroslava Maksymenko, under Part 2 of Article 364 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine — abuse of official position resulting in grave consequences. The pre-trial investigation is being conducted by NABU under the direction of SAPO head Oleksandr Klymenko.

At the heart of the case is the seized mansion of Vitaliy Zakharchenko, the former Minister of Internal Affairs during Yanukovych’s era, located on Dobrovolchykh Batalioniv Street in Kyiv. The property spans 647 square meters, and its estimated value, according to an independent expert’s assessment, exceeds 48 million hryvnias. Formally, the object was under ARMA’s management, but in reality, the state had no real control over it, while influence remained with Zakharchenko’s entourage.

According to the investigation, the mansion was not used as a source of income despite its obvious potential. Moreover, at a certain period, it was occupied by the then Minister of Energy, Herman Halushchenko, and former Minister Svitlana Hrynchuk. Halushchenko rented the house for approximately 3,000 dollars per month, but these expenses were not reflected in his declaration.

At the same time, ARMA, with budget funding of about 100 million hryvnias for managing seized assets, failed to conduct the necessary procurements and did not implement a transparent management system for the property. As a result, the state not only lost control over the asset but also missed out on potential revenue.

The minimum damage to the budget due to the property not being rented at market rates is estimated by the investigation at 3.6 million hryvnias. This is only a preliminary assessment that does not account for lost profits, depreciation of the property, or the consequences of its effective «manual» use.

The essence of the accusations boils down to a systemic problem. Instead of turning seized property into a source of income for the state, ARMA allowed a regime of «hidden use» — without holding tenders, transparent agreements, or real control. Under such conditions, the state’s presence is merely nominal, while certain officials and their associates reap the actual benefits.

The case of Yaroslava Maksymenko appears not as an isolated incident but as part of a larger problem. «Mindichgate» demonstrates how anti-corruption tools can be applied selectively, and seized assets become not a source of budget revenue but convenient real estate for representatives of the authorities. Now, the investigation must determine whether this was mere negligence or part of a deliberate scheme to maintain control over the property of individuals from the previous regime.