Kyiv’s Pechersky District Court ordered pre-trial detention as a preventive measure for Nestor Shufrych, a member of parliament from the banned party OPZZH (pictured in the center), on September 15, 2023. Earlier, law enforcement officials announced suspicion of treason against him, and the Security Service of Ukraine conducted searches at Shufrych’s residence. Suspilne News / Oleksandr Magula
As reported by the media Slidstvo.info
For over two years Nestor Shufrych has been in custody – an experienced participant in Ukrainian politics and a member of parliament from the political force “Opposition Platform – For Life.” In September 2023, the Security Service of Ukraine informed him of a suspicion of state treason. According to the investigation, in 2021 he allegedly followed the instructions of Volodymyr Sivkovych, the former deputy head of the National Security and Defense Council during the Yanukovych era, who after the Maidan moved to Russia and, according to the SBU, was recruited by the FSB. Shufrych is also suspected of funding actions aimed at overthrowing the constitutional order and changing the borders of Ukraine through paying for security services for a plot in occupied Crimea.
The politician himself denies guilt and states that the persecution has a political motive. On September 24, the Shevchenkivskyi Court of Kyiv began the substantive hearing. Below is presented, according to the materials of the investigation, how Shufrych allegedly worked for Russia and how the defense refutes these claims. From both sides, there are arguments that will determine the next steps in this high-profile case.
The charges and the defense’s arguments
According to the investigation, in 2010–2013 Shufrych established connections with pro-Russian circles and coordinated actions aimed at discrediting Ukraine’s leadership. The prosecution also claims that he helped justify Russia’s interests through public speeches and appeals to state authorities with demands to change leadership in certain sectors of the state. Alongside this, there is mention of activity at a family estate in Simeiz and security expenses related to a plot whose control was allegedly taken over by Russian structures and which is regarded as financing an illegal armed formation.
The defense rejects the presented evidentiary base. According to defense representatives, there are no official documents between the security contracts for the plot and the payments, so the fact of payment cannot serve as a basis for charges. The deputy also believes that his contacts with Sivkovych did not mean a conspiracy with Russia, and the actions should be interpreted as activity within the framework of lawful parliamentary work. He emphasizes that his positions have not been coordinated with foreign centers of influence, and that he acts as a people’s deputy, not as an agent of a foreign state.
«I do not deny that I spoke with him. I have known him for about 20 years; we have worked together in various structures. But the court has not established that he is a traitor or an FSB agent, and I do not see grounds to consider myself an agent of a foreign state.»
In his arguments, he adds that suspicions of treason appeared only in 2022, while contacts with Sivkovych occurred earlier, so he could not have known about the possible involvement of the latter in working for the enemy. The defense also emphasizes that the correspondence, which allegedly confirms coordination with the enemy, was found on a flash drive during a search in another case, therefore the evidence is inadmissible. Even if the correspondence were authentic, it does not prove illegality of actions, since the materials covered only parliamentary inquiries and public statements.
«This is a simple matter: a parliamentary inquiry regarding whether there is a criminal proceeding against Judge Chausa, who was found in the Vinnytsia forest – in underwear. I do not want Ukrainian judges to be found in underwear in our forests, and in foreign forests as well.»
The defense also emphasizes the lack of official contracts for guarding the plot or confirmations of financial payments, as well as doubts about applying the provision on financing unlawful formations in 2016 and its retroactive effect. The lawyers plan to continue to defend the defense line in court, disputing any claims of financing the overthrow of the constitutional order as unlawful.
The prosecutor’s office continues work on the second part of the indictment, which concerns financing the change of Ukraine’s borders. The court is currently focused on the first episode – treason. The next hearing is scheduled for October 30, 2025, during which the prosecutor should finish presenting the indictment, and the court will determine the next steps regarding arrest and trial.
In this case, Shufrych continues to deny guilt and firmly defends his position on upholding legality and the political freedom to act both in parliamentary work and beyond. This is one of the most notable investigations in modern Ukrainian politics.
«No one coordinated my position with anyone: not in Brussels, not in Washington, not in Moscow. This was my position. For every word I am ready to bear personal political responsibility!»
We recommend paying attention to:
- Kyiv court upheld preventive measure for Nestor Shufrych, accused of treason, despite defense requests for house arrest due to health concerns.
- Ukrainian MP Yevheniy Shevchenko faces charges of treason and fraud after investigation by DBR and SBU, with potential life imprisonment if convicted.
- The story of Georgiy Gongadze, a prominent Ukrainian journalist kidnapped and murdered in 2000, remains a symbol of the fight for truth and media freedom in Ukraine.
