Facts

Mudra's defense team asking court, journalists to take critical look at prosecution's wording

Mudra's defense team asking court, journalists to take critical look at prosecution's wording

The defense team for Iryna Mudra, the former deputy head of the President's Office who is suspected of involvement in corruption schemes involving money laundering and corporate raiding, is calling on the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) and media representatives to take a critical view of the statements made by the prosecutor in justifying the need to impose a preventive measure in the form of pretrial detention with an alternative bail of UAH 150 million.

Speaking on Monday at the HACC hearing on the selection of a preventive measure for Mudra, the defense specifically pointed out that the phrase from the National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) document regarding "control of corruption" does not actually belong to Mudra, and that the context of the phrase has been altered. The attorney explained that "control of corruption" is an indicator as defined by the World Bank – that is, a metric that measures a country's level of protection against corruption. It was precisely in this context, according to the defense, that this phrase was used.

In other words, as Mudra's defense asserts, the excerpts from the covert investigative actions cited by the prosecutor are incomplete; the prosecutor does not provide full quotes, thereby distorting the meaning of the conversations.

"I ask the court not to rely on subjective interpretations," the attorney urged, adding that he calls on media representatives to do the same.

In general, according to the defense, there is no need to impose a preventive measure as such, since the risks listed by the prosecutor do not exist. According to him, Mudra has not changed her place of residence or traveled abroad at any time, and while covert investigative actions were being conducted, the prosecutor's office never once applied to the court regarding the need to impose a preventive measure.

"A preventive measure is not mandatory… There is no such obligation under the Code of Criminal Procedure. We will ask the court to refuse to impose a preventive measure altogether," the attorney said.

IMPORTANT