According to information the National Police provided in response to a TI Ukraine request, the acute shortage of electronic monitoring devices (EMDs), commonly known as electronic bracelets — for monitoring suspects and defendants persists.
Current situation with electronic bracelets:
-
300 EMDs are on the National Police’s books.
-
32 EMDs have been lost, including due to hostilities.
-
115 EMDs are defective.
-
8 EMDs are undergoing post‑lifecycle testing to determine whether they can still be used safely and effectively.
Thus, only 145 electronic monitoring devices remain operational, and all of them are currently in use to monitor suspects and defendants whom courts have ordered to wear EMDs. There are therefore no free, serviceable devices left in the country.
In effect, almost half of the available bracelets are unusable. The National Police said the last procurement of EMDs took place at the end of 2019, and new tenders are planned in 2025–2026, subject to funding.
This creates serious obstacles to the effective application of interim measures, especially in NABU cases, where defendants are often influential individuals with the connections and resources to abscond abroad. As we have previously written, around 12% of HACC cases are heard without the defendants present because they are evading the court.
In situations where a court orders a suspect/defendant to wear an EMD but the police have no free device, the defense typically asks the court to amend the list of obligations.
Their main arguments are that there is no need to continue this measure because:
-
The EMD was never actually placed on the person; and
-
The suspect/defendant has not violated any other obligations during the period when they were supposed to wear the bracelet.
Striking examples:
-
Odarchenko case: the court ordered the then‑suspect MP to wear an EMD. However, due to the lack of available devices, the obligation was never enforced. The court later canceled it, accepting the defense’s arguments about the absence of other violations and the lack of free EMDs. Shortly before closing arguments and the verdict, the defendant fled abroad.
-
Pavlo Kyrylenko case: a similar situation occurred here. The then‑suspect was ordered to wear an EMD, but because no device was available, the obligation was never implemented and was later canceled by the court. One criminal proceeding against Kyrylenko is already on trial, and in another proceeding involving him and his wife, the NABU completed the pre-trial investigation this week.
These cases highlight a systemic problem: even when there is a court order, its execution may be impossible due to a shortage of technical means. This creates favorable conditions for evading justice and undermines trust in the system.