Today, the HACC Appeals Chamber heard the defense's appeal on behalf of Serhii Kropyva, also known as “the Chancellor,” a Prosecutor General's Office official and a figure in the Carthage case.

On September 6, 2026, the HACC set the Chancellor's preventive measure: detention, with the alternative of UAH 120 million bail.

The defense's position

The lawyers maintain that the suspicion against Kropyva is unfounded. Circumstances that would confirm Kropyva's guilt of the charged acts — namely, legalizing criminally obtained funds — were disregarded. Defense counsel also stressed that the notice of suspicion does not name a single call center that, according to the prosecution, Kropyva assisted and took kickbacks from. The defense went on to raise an argument that had been central when the preventive measure was set on September 6: no suspect has been served a notice of suspicion under Article 368 of the Criminal Code, which means there is no predicate offense.

The defense reiterated a point it had made at the preventive measure hearing: there was no criminal organization behind the alleged offense. The lawyers argued that the people subjected to preventive measures in the Carthage case had no stable ties that would allow them to commit the alleged crimes. Defense counsel also examined the September 6 ruling that set Kropyva's preventive measure. The defense said it disagreed with the reasoning behind the risks described by the HACC investigating judge. The lawyers contend that the claims Kropyva might flee and hide from the investigation and the court are groundless. Kropyva's defense therefore asked the court to overturn the first-instance ruling imposing his preventive measure.

Kropyva's position

Serhii Kropyva said that many of the phrases on the released tapes are not his. As at his preventive measure hearing on September 6, he said his words were “Odesa slang.” Kropyva also said he agreed with his lawyers: no criminal organization ever existed.

He stressed that his main goal now is to prove his innocence, not to flee or hide from the investigation and the court.

In closing, Kropyva asked for his bail to be reduced to the amount of his declared assets — UAH 2 million. He also sought changes to the list of people he is barred from contacting. Kropyva asked to be allowed to communicate with Tetiana Kraievska (his wife's aunt), Liudmyla Horobets (his wife's aunt), and Viktoriia Dydych (his sister).

The prosecution's position

The prosecution maintains that Kropyva committed the crimes he is charged with: providing cover for call centers and legalizing illegally obtained funds. He was the one heading the criminal scheme. The prosecutor read out excerpts from Kropyva's conversations with two other suspects — his driver, Kutsyi, and lawyer Dydych — in which they discuss the details of a scheme to legalize apartments in the Carpathians. The prosecutor further stressed that Kropyva said plainly in these conversations that once another investigation into prosecutors buying apartments in the Carpathians came out, he deliberately set about an operation to preserve his property. After the steps to legalize the property, the prosecutor said, Kropyva also deliberately oversaw the destruction of evidence: his accomplices' phones were wiped, and paper evidence was destroyed. The prosecutor specifically addressed the defense's claim that Kropyva does not have UAH 120 million for bail. The prosecution listed a number of assets controlled by Kropyva whose combined value far exceeds the bail amount set as his alternative preventive measure. The investigation is therefore convinced that the suspect is able to post bail. Accordingly, the prosecutor disagreed with the defense that the ruling imposing Kropyva's preventive measure should be overturned.

After deliberation, the court left Kropyva's preventive measure unchanged.