Theme: Criminal defence

Prolonged detention is one of the most sensitive issues in criminal law. In many cases, a restrictive measure effectively transforms into a punishment, violating fundamental human rights. One such instance became a focal point for the Riyako & Partners team when a client, who had been held in custody for years, sought our assistance.

For several years, the restrictive measure remained in force without proper justification: the court of first instance issued two convictions, both of which were subsequently challenged on appeal. This situation directly contravened Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the right to liberty and security of person.

When the national justice system fails to function correctly, recourse to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) becomes essential. It was a ruling from this Court that proved pivotal in the case, confirming the human rights violation and facilitating the client’s release after nearly seven years in detention.

Our Actions The legal team at Riyako & Partners, alongside specialists in ECHR defence led by Oleksandr Shevtsov, undertook comprehensive work on behalf of the client:

  • Prepared and filed a substantiated motion with the Court of Appeal to vary the client’s restrictive measure;
  • Justified the legal position by citing the ECHR ruling in the case of “X and Others v. Ukraine”;
  • Successfully secured a judicial review of the court’s position and the client’s release from custody.

This decision was not only a victory for the client but also a significant precedent for the protection of human rights in Ukraine. We believe that even in the most complex cases, the right to liberty can be upheld through consistent and intellectual legal action.

Analytical products from the  Economic Security Bureau of Ukraine  (ESBU) are increasingly becoming the starting point for audits, inquiries, and criminal proceedings. Consequently, it is vital for businesses and corporate lawyers to understand what a ESBU analytical product entails, how it is generated, and how to address it in practice.

Oleksandr Shevtsov, Head of Criminal Practice at Riyako & Partners, addressed these issues during the XVII Kyiv Criminal Law Forum organised by the Ukrainian Advocates’ Association.

What is a BES Analytical Product? An analytical product is the result of analysing vast datasets, including tax information, customs data, official registers, financial indicators, and open-source intelligence (OSINT). Based on this analysis, conclusions are drawn regarding potential risks within a business’s operations. In practice, these findings often explain why a company has fallen under the scrutiny of regulatory authorities.

Does it Constitute Evidence in a Criminal Case? Oleksandr placed particular emphasis on the evidentiary weight of analytical products. In itself, such a product does not equate to an established fact of a violation; however, it may be utilised as a documentary record within criminal proceedings. Therefore, it is crucial not to ignore such materials but to understand the data used, the conclusions reached, and what specifically can and should be challenged or refuted.

How Businesses Should Address Analytical Findings Business defence solicitor Oleksandr Shevtsov shared key tools for counteraction:

  • Ensuring the proper documentation of business transactions;
  • Utilising formal solicitors’ inquiries, temporary access orders, and witness examinations to substantiate the value of goods, the authenticity of business operations, and to refute allegations of related-party transactions;
  • Initiating tax audits;
  • Conducting a comprehensive range of expert assessments: economic, forensic commodity, technical, and handwriting analysis.

Understanding the logic behind such analytical tools is now a critical component of corporate security and protecting a business from law enforcement pressure.

Our client was served with a notice of suspicion regarding the alleged unlawful acquisition of a land plot within the city of Kyiv, alongside a motion for the restrictive measure of remand in custody.

However, the circumstances of the case proved to be far from evident, and the prosecution failed to provide sufficient grounds for the application of the most severe restrictive measure.

Our Actions The legal team at Riyako & Partners analysed all materials of the criminal proceedings and the evidence gathered by the prosecution, identifying:

  • A lack of evidence linking the client to the commission of the alleged criminal offence;
  • Unsubstantiated and unproven claims regarding the scale of the damages caused;
  • Numerous procedural violations during the conduct of investigative and legal actions.

A thorough and rapid analysis of the case materials enabled our solicitors to prepare reasoned objections against the proposed detention and to effectively present the defence’s position in court.

The Result Instead of remand in custody, the court applied a more lenient restrictive measure in the form of night-time house arrest, which was subsequently commuted to a personal recognisance (personal undertaking).

In a short timeframe, we achieved the best possible outcome for the client and established a robust position for their further defence during the trial. Speed is our deliberate priority in crisis management scenarios.

Solicitors from Riyako & Partners have been named among the winners of the annual national ranking, “Client Choice: TOP 100 Lawyers of Ukraine,” which summarises the performance of law firms for 2025.

For us, this recognition is about client trust, complex cases that cannot always be disclosed publicly, and systematic teamwork in situations where the price of an error is reputation, business, or liberty.

The following experts were highlighted in the ranking:

About the Ranking “Client Choice: TOP 100 Lawyers of Ukraine” is an annual comprehensive ranking by Yurydychna Gazeta (Legal Gazette) that identifies the country’s leading lawyers and law firms based on their yearly results.

The ranking is established based on:

  • Client feedback;
  • Professional market assessment;
  • Analysis of practice and reputation within key sectors of law and the economy.

We would like to thank our clients and colleagues for their choice and trust. For the Riyako & Partners team, this award is further confirmation that we are moving in the right direction.

Tax disputes are increasingly transcending financial penalties and entering the realm of criminal prosecution. For businesses, this entails not only audits but also genuine risks to owners, senior management, assets, and reputation.

This subject was the focus of a presentation by Yevgen Riako, CEO of RIYAKO & PARTNERS, at the VIII International Criminal Law Forum.

During his address, Yevgen concentrated on the practical aspects of criminal tax proceedings and the shifting approaches of law enforcement agencies towards businesses:

  • Key triggers for initiating criminal tax proceedings;
  • Typical errors made by businesses during the early stages of audits;
  • The use of criminal proceedings as a tool for pressure;
  • The new logic of business interaction with the Bureau of Economic Security (ESBU).

“The system is gradually changing. Although many remain sceptical, our practice demonstrates that a partnership with the ESBU is possible if the business and its legal counsel understand the logic behind the detectives’ work and their KPIs. The Bureau is shaping a new philosophy of conduct for businesses and communicates specific ‘red flags’ to help firms stay off the law enforcement radar: employment percentages, salary levels, and the excessive use of individual entrepreneurs (FOPs),” shared Yevgen.

The solicitor clarified that while the prosecution’s stance sometimes acts as a deterrent in this process, legal mechanisms already exist to move forward lawfully. However, systemic issues remain that are critical for both the business and professional communities:

  • Improving the quality of analytical products, taking into account their regulatory framework, the accountability of analysts, and the possibility of appeal;
  • Synchronising the positions of the ESBU and the State Tax Service to avoid the duplication of claims in tax cases;
  • The possibility of resolving tax risks prior to the registration of criminal proceedings in the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations (ERDR).

If you have any questions for the solicitors at Riyako & Partners, please contact us here.

On 26 March, our managing partner, attorney Yevgen Riako, conducted an online conference module entitled ‘Preliminary Hearings and Other Court Procedures’ as part of the ‘Preparation for Court Proceedings in Criminal Cases’ block of the Legal High School’s Criminal Practice School.

In particular, during the webinar, the lawyer analysed successful cases of appealing suspicions and the consequences for criminal proceedings.

According to the lawyer, the most popular reasons for appeal are:

  1. the content of the suspicion
  2. legal qualification;
  3. another set of reasons — violation of the procedure for delivering the notice of suspicion.

 

Online Conference: Preliminary Hearings and Court Procedures

In addition, the solicitor addressed the following questions:

  • Which types of suspicion are subject to appeal?
  • In which other instances can a notice of suspicion be successfully challenged?

In the second part of his presentation, Yevgen Riako discussed the specific actions a lawyer should take to conduct a preliminary hearing effectively.

The solicitor noted that upon receiving the indictment, the court has two further courses of action:

  1. To list the case for trial;
  2. To rule that the indictment be returned.

The solicitor analysed each of these options in detail. Furthermore, he examined the specific circumstances under which a court may return an indictment.

Our thanks go to the organisers and all those who attended the event!

Forensic examinations are one of the most crucial tools for substantiating a position, both for the prosecution and the defence, in any legal case, especially in complex and multifaceted cases such as those involving embezzlement in procurement for defence and infrastructure needs.

Over the past two years, there has been a significant increase in the number of registered criminal proceedings in the field of public procurement.

According to statistical data from the Office of the Prosecutor General, while law enforcement agencies initiated pre-trial investigations into 270–330 criminal offences in this area annually up to 2021, this number dropped to 263 in 2022, rose to 727 similar offences in 2023, and reached 997 cases in the first 10 months of 2024.

Public procurement for defence and infrastructure needs constitutes a significant share of overall procurement. The proportion of criminal offences recorded by law enforcement in this area during 2023–2024 is consistent with the trends observed in previous years for this category.

This trend, among other things, reflects the heightened scrutiny of all types of public defence procurement by law enforcement agencies.

What Are the Key Indicators for Initiating a Pre-Trial Investigation from the Perspective of Law Enforcement?

Based on the results of procurement for defence and infrastructure needs, representatives of both the supplier and the buyer may become subjects of criminal prosecution if the following indicators, according to law enforcement authorities, are present:

  • Provision of goods or services at inflated prices; non-compliance of the supplied goods or services with the requirements of tender documentation and the contract;
  • Failure of the supplier to fulfil obligations under the concluded contract properly;
  • Violation of procurement procedures by either the buyer or the supplier;
  • Alteration of contract terms after it has been concluded.

At the same time, the most common legal provisions used to classify criminal offences in cases of procurement for defence and infrastructure needs are:

  • Article 191 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine – regarding the embezzlement or misappropriation of budget funds by officials of both the supplier and the buyer;
  • Articles 367 and 425 (for military officials) of the Criminal Code of Ukraine – regarding negligence by officials in performing their duties, leading to unjustified expenditures of budget funds;
  • Article 366 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine – regarding the inclusion of false information by officials in tender documents or documents related to the execution of a concluded contract;
  • Articles 364 and 426-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine – regarding decisions made by officials exceeding their authority, resulting in unjustified expenditures of budget funds;
  • Article 358 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine – regarding the creation and use of forged documents, including for participation in procurement and for fulfilling the conditions of a concluded contract;
  • Article 190 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine – regarding the unjustified appropriation of funds by suppliers through fraudulent actions.

At the same time, during the pre-trial investigation, the defence must be prepared to refute the stated circumstances using legally provided tools, the most effective of which are forensic examinations.

According to Article 101 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, an expert opinion is a detailed description of the studies conducted by the expert, the conclusions drawn from those studies, and substantiated answers to the questions posed by the party engaging the expert or by the investigating judge or court that ordered the examination.

In the context of criminal proceedings, each party has the right to present an expert opinion to the court, based on the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialised knowledge.

When Can the Defence Conduct Forensic Examinations in Criminal Proceedings Related to Procurement for Defence and Infrastructure Needs?

The defence can conduct forensic examinations in criminal proceedings of this category both during the pre-trial investigation and during the court trial stage, with the purposes of such examinations often overlapping.

At the pre-trial investigation stage, it is not necessary to wait for a formal notice of suspicion to initiate and conduct the relevant forensic examinations.

Law enforcement agencies gather evidence prior to issuing a notice of suspicion, including by sending requests under Article 93 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine and executing investigative judges’ orders for temporary access to items and documents. From these documents, potential participants in such criminal proceedings can learn about the key circumstances of the alleged offence and take measures to refute the existence of criminal elements in the investigated case even before a notice of suspicion is issued.

Such actions must be undertaken at this stage, including to refute the following circumstances:

  1. inflated prices for supplied goods or services;
  2. improper fulfilment of contract terms;
  3. non-compliance of supplied goods or services with the tender documentation and the concluded contract;
  4. the amount of damage caused;
  5. poor quality of supplied goods;
  6. discrepancy between the cost and volume of completed work.

At the same time, the direct objectives of conducting forensic examinations by the defence may include, in particular:

  • obtaining additional evidence to refute the charges brought or to mitigate the responsibility of the accused;
  • challenging the conclusions of examinations conducted by the prosecution; obtaining new information that may influence the court’s decision;
  • proving the legality of the supplier’s business activities.

In a broader sense, conducting forensic and comprehensive forensic examinations supports the defence strategy by contributing to:

  1. Ensuring the establishment of objective truth: Forensic examinations provide an independent assessment of evidence, which is crucial for establishing the truth in a case.
  2. Refuting charges: Expert conclusions can disprove the presence of a criminal offence or reduce the degree of culpability of the accused.
  3. Substantiating the defence’s position: Expert conclusions serve as a significant argument for the court and can influence its decision.
  4. Protecting rights and legitimate interests: The defence has the right to a comprehensive and impartial investigation, and forensic examinations are one of the ways to ensure this right.

In such circumstances, the successful implementation of the client’s defence strategy is practically impossible without the defence obtaining expert opinions on the key aspects of the charges brought or the suspicion raised.

What Types of Forensic Examinations Can the Defence Use in Criminal Proceedings Related to Defence and Infrastructure Procurement?

Depending on the nature of the crime under investigation and the incriminating circumstances of its commission, the following types of forensic examinations are almost essential for the defence to ensure a successful strategy:

  • Forensic Commodity Examination: to refute allegations of inflated costs of supplied goods, confirm their compliance with the contract terms and specifications, and more.
  • Forensic Economic Examination: to verify the supplier’s business operations, confirm the cost of goods and services based on production cost calculations, refute allegations of financial damage, or objectively establish the amount of such damage.
  • Forensic Handwriting Examination: to confirm or refute the authenticity of signatures on official documents, and to challenge indications of forged signatures.
  • Technical Examination of Documents: to verify or refute the authenticity of seals, and identify signs of document forgery, including signatures and stamps.
  • Forensic Examination of Accounting, Taxation, and Reporting Documents, and Forensic Examination of Documents on the Economic Activities of Enterprises and Organisations: to analyse the financial and business activities of companies involved in procurement, refute signs of fraud and other financial violations.
  • Forensic Construction and Technical Examination: to challenge allegations of discrepancies in the volume and cost of completed construction or design works, or the quality of their execution in relation to the requirements of tender documentation.

In certain cases, it is advisable to appoint and conduct comprehensive forensic examinations to allow simultaneous analysis by experts from various fields. For example, a combined commodity examination and materials, substances, and products examination may be conducted when a commodity examination requires an analysis of the chemical composition of materials included in the product.

At the same time, it is important to understand that appointing and conducting a forensic examination is a complex and responsible process that requires professional knowledge and expertise. Therefore, selecting an expert should be approached with great care, taking into account the specialisation and credibility of the expert institution. Experienced experts ensure high-quality examinations and the reliability of the results obtained.

Thus, forensic examinations are an indispensable tool for protecting rights and legitimate interests in cases of embezzlement in defence procurement. Professionally conducted examinations provide objective data, refute accusations, and prove innocence.