Ukraine's National Anti-Corruption Bureau, the state-owned nuclear firm Energoatom and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's circle are at the center of a scandal that investigators say involved a wartime kickback operation and roughly $100 million in laundering. But as "Mindich-gate" roils Kyiv, a parallel question is emerging for the National Bank of Ukraine and the country's financial watchdogs: how did a purported money-moving pipeline operate "without triggering a single alarm" inside the banking system?
NABU and the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office have said Operation Midas uncovered a high-level criminal organisation that "latched onto" Energoatom, extracting 10-15% "tribute" from suppliers and routing funds through a Kyiv "back office." Investigators have described nearly a thousand hours of covert recordings and said $4 million was seized directly in cash.
The alleged mastermind, investigators say, is businessman Tymur Mindich, described as a long-time partner of Zelenskyy and a co-founder of Kvartal 95 who left Ukraine hours before searches began. The political shock widened with the dismissal of presidential office chief Andriy Yermak, whom NABU recordings referenced under the nickname "Ali Baba."
As the case moved from wiretaps to resignations and reputational damage, a key claim surfaced in parliamentary hearings: Filip Pronin, head of the State Financial Monitoring Service, told lawmakers that not a single Ukrainian bank submitted a suspicious transaction report tied to individuals now featured in the Energoatom case. Pronin said the agency saw only isolated "threshold" transactions, a description that-if accurate-would leave an obvious mismatch between the alleged scale of laundering and the signals banks are designed to generate.
The dissonance has become a focal point for two prominent commentators pressing the regulator. Financial journalist Olena Lysenko framed the problem as binary: if the monitoring service received no reports, either banks failed basic compliance and AML controls, or someone ensured certain clients would never be treated as risky. In Lysenko's account, the informal mechanism is straightforward-calls urging banks to "accommodate our people," paired with a message to "don't touch our people," and a warning not to "snitch" to the Financial Monitoring Service.
Lysenko's critique also rests on contrast. She argues the system can be unforgiving to "small folk," while politically connected accounts become effectively "untouchable," a claim that, if substantiated, would cut into the credibility of wartime governance and the integrity of Ukraine's anti-corruption architecture.
Economist and former banker Borys Kushniruk has centered his argument on National Bank of Ukraine Deputy Governor Dmytro Oliynyk, a former top manager at the state-owned Oschadbank. In a trilogy of columns for UNIAN, Kushniruk laid out what he called the Oliynyk family's "Dubai trail," citing indicators compliance specialists often treat as "red flags," including a "convenient divorce before expensive assets appear" and a lifestyle he argues looks out of line with declared income.
Kushniruk notes that the High Anti-Corruption Court has already obliged NABU to open proceedings to verify the origin of the Oliynyk family's assets. He wrote that "If even a hint of a 'slush fund' appears at the NBU's apex, it's a direct blow to trust in the regulator and the hryvnia in Western partners' eyes," tying the issue to donor confidence as much as domestic politics.
His broader allegation is that supervision can be applied selectively, "as an instrument of political pressure." Kushniruk writes that regulators have tightened payment channels for licensed gambling operators, while the state lottery operator MSL appears more insulated, a disparity he links to political patronage and public positioning by Finance Committee chairman Danylo Hetmantsev.
Key figures and claims now shaping the debate include:
- Energoatom contract kickbacks: 10-15% "tribute," investigators say
- Alleged laundering scale: ~$100 million routed via a Kyiv "back office"
- Cash seized: $4 million, investigators say
- Bank reporting claim: 0 suspicious transaction reports tied to key individuals, according to Filip Pronin
At the top of the chain sits NBU Governor Andriy Pyshnyy, who appointed Oliynyk after taking over the central bank in autumn 2022 and reorganized supervision under his deputy's control. No official suspicions have been announced against Pyshnyy or Oliynyk, and the text itself underscores that none of the allegations constitute proof of their criminal participation in the Energoatom scheme.
