A billion-dollar "granite scheme": how Russian businessman Naumets’ sanctioned company Unigran was transferred to businessman Serhiy Shapran, bypassing the state

A billion-dollar "granite scheme": how Russian businessman Naumets’ sanctioned company Unigran was transferred to businessman Serhiy Shapran, bypassing the state

The scandalous sanctioned business empire "Unigran" of Russian businessman Ihor Naumets, which was taken over by Brovary ex-deputy and businessman Serhiy Shapran and his partner Volodymyr Osipov (a former deputy of the Odesa Regional Council from the "Opposition Bloc"), continues to be looted. This is happening despite the fact that "Unigran" assets are frozen and property is under arrest.

The situation is being ignored by the Ministry of Justice, the Asset Recovery and Management Agency (ARMA), and the Office of the Prosecutor General (OPG) of Ukraine. In particular, the Ministry of Justice is not providing the opportunity to nationalize "Unigran," – assets worth about 1 billion UAH.

The Ministry has not filed a lawsuit with the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) during the tenure of three ministers already. In its responses to journalists’ inquiries, the Ministry has effectively failed to explain why it is not taking decisive steps. The inaction has been justified, for example, by the claim that the Ministry of Justice must receive "comprehensive information and copies of documents from competent authorities regarding the grounds for applying sanctions to confiscate assets into state revenue" concerning Naumets.

Meanwhile, Shapran and Osipov continue their struggle for control over "Unigran," which should have long been generating revenue not for them, but for the state. Judging by everything, these businessmen are not above bribing judges – striking examples of such decisions continue to appear in the court registry.

Suspicious courts

On December 1, 2025, the Commercial Court of Zhytomyr Region (Judge Svitlana Kravets) announced a decision in case 906/396/25. In this case, Westgrinite Holdings Limited, controlled by Igor Naumets, requested the invalidation of contracts for the resale of railway rolling stock of the "Unigran" holding (120 wagons of various types – here is their list).

Judge Kravets did not accept the evidence and denied the claim. The mentioned wagons, after sanctions were applied to Igor Naumets and Westgrinite Holdings Limited itself, were resold by a subsidiary of Westgrinite Holdings Limited named LLC "Unigran" (EDRPOU 24584514), specifically acquired for this purpose by LLC "Marten Locks" (EDRPOU 41869649). The latter, to create the illusion of a bona fide acquirer, resold them to LLC "Uni Stone Plant" (EDRPOU code 45234489). The owner of the latter is Serhiy Shapran.

Both the plaintiff and the Ministry of Justice argued that the mentioned transactions violate the sanctions applied to Naumets and are therefore invalid. The Ministry of Justice insisted that these transactions contradict the interests of the state, were carried out deliberately, and therefore everything transferred under them should be confiscated into state revenue.

Another important detail – these operations fully correspond to a previously publicized memorandum between Naumets and Shapran, which was published in the media. As far as we know, the court was also provided with evidence of Naumets’ control over Westgrinite Holdings Limited and LLC "Unigran," including an official copy of the mentioned memorandum.

The court justified its decision by stating that such a claim should have been filed by LLC "Unigran" itself, not Naumets’ company Westgrinite. But what can be stated with certainty today is that the court considered the resale of property controlled by sanctioned individuals through intermediaries to be in compliance with the law and not invalid.

Otherwise, regardless of the parties’ claims, under Article 216 of the Civil Code, the court was obliged to apply the consequences of the invalidity of void transactions that violate sanctions.

Moreover, a special government resolution declared transactions involving the sale of vehicles (including wagons!) by persons associated with the Russian Federation to be void.

Thus, the fact of implementing the "Naumets-Shapran memorandum" to violate sanctions has now been recognized as legal and enshrined in a court decision.

Another interesting point: the same Judge Svitlana Kravets simultaneously considered another case regarding the resale of Naumets’ assets (906/1349/24), in which the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU) filed a separate claim to declare similar transactions invalid and to confiscate the resold assets into state revenue, as they violate sanctions. In this case, in addition to the memorandum, the SSU submitted protocols of witness interrogations, who:

• directly participated in the transactions;
• acquired shell companies;
• signed the relevant contracts.

According to their testimonies, the witnesses were aware that they were violating sanctions and were doing so on the instructions of Naumets and Shapran. In other words, Judge Kravets was fully aware of everything that was happening. But even this did not convince her of the invalidity of the contracts.

Regarding the case based on the SSU’s claim, another issue arose – why Judge Kravets did not exempt the SBU from court fees. We refuse to believe that the respected and experienced judge seriously considered the SSU’s claim to be aimed at self-enrichment of the SSU, rather than – as the SBU itself argued – protecting the interests of all citizens affected by Russian aggression. And that she did not understand that her decision would have a chilling effect on the SSU regarding similar claims in similar cases (of which there are as many as 6 in the Commercial Court of Zhytomyr Region alone).

The "Unigran" saga: how it all began

In October 2024, "Schemes" reported how the frozen assets of Naumets’ "Unigran" holding were transferred to a new owner – Serhiy Shapran. The transfer of assets between the two businessmen, as journalists noted, bypassed the state, and Shapran was assisted by his long-time business partner, former "Opposition Bloc" member Volodymyr Osipov.

Ideally, the assets of the sanctioned businessman worth 1 billion UAH should have been seized in favor of the state and then sold at an open auction. The proceeds could have been directed to the army and reconstruction. But in this story, everything followed a different scenario.

The state turned its close attention to "Unigran" and Naumets as early as March 2022. At that time, the SBU reported that it had stopped the activities of an "organization engaged in the illegal extraction of Ukrainian subsoil on an industrial scale." The OPG and the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI), which opened a corresponding case, also emphasized that the holding "directed millions in revenue to finance Russia’s full-scale aggression, as well as to materially support occupation administrations in Crimea and eastern Ukraine."

All of this led to the arrest of "Unigran" assets. In the spring of 2023, sanctions were also imposed on Naumets. A trusted person, to whom the businessman’s assets were attempted to be transferred after the opening of the criminal case, was also added to the blacklist. Sanctions also affected a number of Cypriot firms that own Ukrainian companies of the sanctioned group. The sanctions and arrest should have served as a safeguard against further asset movements, but the businessmen found a way out.

Instead of the state, a private individual – businessman Shapran – became the owner of the assets. Investigators established that the transfer of "Unigran" property to companies in Shapran’s orbit was made possible "thanks to" Judge Serhiy Vovk of the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv. In violation of jurisdiction, he lifted the arrest on the assets, and the prosecutor, at the last moment, withdrew their own appeal against this decision. The scheme was also facilitated by the lack of punishment for circumventing sanctions in Ukrainian legislation.

During conversations with investigators, Naumets himself confirmed that Shapran promised to resolve his "business problems" in exchange for a 50% share, but ultimately allegedly "raided" the entire business. Shapran, in turn, claimed that all the transactions he made "are legal."

Further arrests and inaction of responsible authorities

After the active coverage of Shapran and Naumets’ schemes in the media, the Main Investigative Directorate of the National Police, under the procedural guidance of the OPG, initiated criminal proceedings regarding the illegal sale of "Unigran" assets. These were later merged with the initial case from 2022, including on charges of "tax evasion by the holding" and "schemes to minimize rent payments" during granite extraction.

For the investigation of these events, the National Police organized a separate special operation called "Granite," during which suspicion was reported to 18 individuals. Among them are "Ukrainian and Russian businessmen" (namely, Shapran and Naumets), as well as their accomplices – company executives, accountants, notaries, and other "persons who participated in the scheme of asset re-registration despite the sanctions in place."

Shapran, in particular, is suspected of "legalizing property obtained through criminal means." On June 24, 2025, a preventive measure was chosen – detention with the possibility of posting bail in the amount of 100 million UAH. At that time, it became known that law enforcement detained the businessman in Lviv "during an attempt to flee." However, later the amount was reduced 20-fold, and in September, a bail of 5 million UAH was posted. Since then, neither Shapran nor his lawyers have commented on the progress of the case.

Suspicion under identical charges was also reported to Ihor Naumets. In August 2025, the Russian businessman was declared wanted in Ukraine. According to investigators, Naumets is in London. His defense claims that in the "Unigran" case, the Russian businessman is allegedly a victim.

Since 2025, ARMA has also joined the "Unigran" case. In particular, starting from March, arrested property of the holding was transferred to it – corporate rights, special permits for subsoil use, land plots, and two factories.

However, it turned out that ARMA was likely not transferred everything – the agency stated that during on-site inspections, its employees discovered "movable property directly involved in production activities." This includes, in particular, special equipment – transporters, conveyor belts, pumping stations – which were allegedly not arrested by prosecutors.

However, the new arrests did not solve the problem: some of the assets continued to operate. Moreover, when Shapran was detained, he was heading abroad in a car that was also under arrest. This raised serious questions about the effectiveness of ARMA’s work. For six months, the agency has been "conducting a competition" for the management of "Unigran" assets, which has not yet concluded.

It is important to note that from the very beginning, within the framework of the criminal case, prosecutors emphasized the possible future confiscation of assets. This was also the announced political course: Ukrainian government officials have repeatedly stated their intention to confiscate the assets of Russian businessmen and their accomplices in favor of the state to replenish the budget during the full-scale war.

But since the imposition of sanctions, the relevant lawsuit from the Ministry of Justice has not been filed. A year ago, the Ministry of Justice reported that it would search for assets of Naumets and persons associated with him. A year later, the Ministry of Justice says: the assets have been found, but now they are "establishing the grounds for their confiscation into state revenue."