On 29 May 2025, the HACC AC granted the prosecutor’s appeal against a previous HACC ruling that had denied the request for in-absentia detention of former MP Heorhii Lohvynskyi. He is accused of embezzling UAH 54 million by misleading the European Court of Human Rights. The HACC AC overturned the investigating judge’s ruling and issued a new one, ordering Lohvynskyi’s pre-trial detention in absentia. The court also rejected the defense's appeals.
The prosecutor requested that the initial ruling be canceled and that Lohvynskyi be remanded in custody. The defense objected, arguing that the suspicion was unfounded and sought to have the reasoning in the ruling amended accordingly.
The original motion for in-absentia detention was denied by HACC in January 2024 due to the absence of confirmation that Lohvynskyi was internationally wanted. The court also noted that the evidence had allegedly been gathered in violation of Lohvynskyi’s immunity as the spouse of an ECHR judge.
On 13 June 2024, the HACC AC remitted the case for reconsideration, agreeing with the prosecutor that the suspect was indeed on the international wanted list. The court also concluded that the investigating judge had overstepped by assessing issues beyond the scope of the current procedural stage, particularly concerning the applicability of Lohvynskyi’s immunity.
On 30 October 2024, HACC again rejected the in-absentia detention request. Although the court acknowledged that the suspicion was substantiated at the minimal level required for pre-trial measures, it considered the justification insufficient for detention. Both sides appealed the decision. The appeal proceedings lasted from November 2024 to May 2025.
Lohvynskyi is suspected of organizing a scheme in which the company he controlled, Golden Mandarin, received UAH 54 million from the state budget by filing a claim with the ECHR. In 2015, the ECHR ordered Ukraine to reimburse the company owned by the MP at that time, the amount which he allegedly could not receive for five years due to a decision by the Ukrainian court.
This decision against Ukraine was made under the procedure of an amicable settlement — meaning Ukraine admitted its guilt. According to the prosecution, Lohvynskyi, along with other defendants, deliberately misled the court. In 2024, the ECHR declared a new complaint from Golden Mandarin Oil LLC inadmissible due to abuse of the right of application.