On February 19, 2026, the HACC began questioning Ihor Pavlovskyi, a former deputy minister of defense charged with embezzling UAH 58 million in a fuel procurement scheme for the armed forces.
Pavlovskyi provided background information on his biography and military career, saying he rose from a maritime college graduate to a General Staff employee and then Deputy Minister of Defense of Ukraine (April–October 2016). In that role, he said, he coordinated the work of about 16 departments, engaged in the development and procurement of military equipment. He currently works as a military consultant at Luch State Kyiv Design Bureau and teaches at Dragomanov Ukrainian State University.
The prosecutor questioned him about his familiarity with the 2016 state fuel procurement process and his relationships with other defendants. Pavlovskyi said he has known Volodymyr Hulevych (former director of the Ministry of Defense’s Department of Public Procurement and Supply of Material Resources) since 2014, but denied any personal acquaintance with Borys Malysh or Volodymyr Trofymenko, the owner and director of the company that won the fuel tender.
Pavlovskyi also stressed that the procurement department is an independent unit with its own instructions, and that a deputy minister does not interfere in its day-to-day operations. He said he could not physically know the details of each of the more than 3,700 fuel supply agreements, and that his duties were limited to administrative coordination rather than conducting business transactions.
As for the document-signing process, he stated that the supply documentation packages he signed were prepared directly by the relevant departments within the Ministry of Defense, which operate independently.
The prosecutor showed documents from the case file (minutes, letters, and written instructions) and asked about Pavlovskyi’s role in preparing them. Pavlovskyi denied directly participating in meetings about raising fuel prices, saying those issues were handled at the level of the General Staff and the defense minister due to a critical supply situation. Regarding the approval of a 5.3% price increase after the procurement (while the tender-winning company requested 15.2%, citing economic conditions), he said it was not his personal initiative but a consolidated position agreed within the Ministry of Defense.
The prosecution alleges that Pavlovskyi and other defendants, without legally prescribed grounds, arranged an unjustified increase in petroleum product prices by preparing and signing addenda to fuel supply contracts for the Ministry of Defense.
