Brother of Ukraine’s State Bureau of Investigation Director Acquired 143 Properties at Smartphone Prices, Investigation Reveals

A major investigative report published by Ukrainian journalists has uncovered a troubling pattern of property acquisitions by the brother of Ukraine’s State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) director. According to the joint investigation conducted by Slidstvo.Info and the Anti-Corruption Action Center (AntAC), the official’s sibling managed to purchase 143 real estate properties at prices so low they rival the cost of a smartphone. The findings have raised serious questions about potential corruption at the highest levels of Ukraine’s law enforcement apparatus and the integrity of property transactions in the country.

The investigation meticulously documented how these properties were acquired through what appear to be highly irregular transactions. In some cases, apartments and other real estate objects were reportedly purchased for amounts ranging from just a few hundred to a few thousand hryvnias – sums that would barely cover the cost of a modern mobile phone in Ukraine. Such pricing stands in stark contrast to actual market values, where even modest apartments in Ukrainian cities typically cost hundreds of thousands of hryvnias. The journalists spent months gathering documentation, analyzing property registries, and cross-referencing financial records to build their case.

The State Bureau of Investigation holds a crucial position in Ukraine’s law enforcement hierarchy. Established in 2017 as part of post-Maidan reforms, the SBI was designed to investigate crimes committed by high-ranking officials, judges, law enforcement officers, and military personnel. The bureau was created with international support and was intended to serve as an independent body capable of holding powerful figures accountable. The fact that such serious allegations now surround the family of its director represents a significant blow to the institution’s credibility and Ukraine’s broader anti-corruption efforts, which have been a key requirement for the country’s European Union accession process.

Property manipulation schemes have long been a favored method of corruption in post-Soviet countries, including Ukraine. These schemes typically involve undervaluing real estate in official documents to minimize taxes, laundering illicit funds, or transferring assets to relatives and associates to hide true ownership. The practice became so widespread that Ukrainian reformers and international partners have pushed for greater transparency in property registries and beneficial ownership disclosure. Despite these efforts, the current investigation suggests that such practices may continue even among families connected to the very institutions tasked with combating corruption.

Anti-corruption activists and civil society organizations have responded to the investigation with calls for immediate action. The Anti-Corruption Action Center, one of Ukraine’s most prominent watchdog organizations, has been instrumental in exposing corruption schemes and advocating for institutional reforms since 2012. Their involvement in this investigation lends additional credibility to the findings. Experts note that the timing of these revelations is particularly sensitive, as Ukraine continues to fight against Russian aggression while simultaneously trying to demonstrate its commitment to European values and the rule of law as part of its EU membership bid.

The implications of this investigation extend beyond one individual case. Ukraine’s Western partners, including the European Union and the United States, have consistently emphasized that continued support depends on genuine progress in fighting corruption. The European Commission’s annual reports on Ukraine’s EU candidacy regularly highlight the need for stronger anti-corruption measures. Allegations involving the family of a top law enforcement official could potentially affect international perceptions of Ukraine’s reform progress and the credibility of its justice institutions at a critical moment in the country’s history.

As of the publication date, there has been no official response from the SBI director or his brother regarding the investigation’s findings. Ukrainian law requires public officials to declare their assets and those of close family members, and discrepancies between declared wealth and actual property holdings can trigger investigations by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) or other authorities. Civil society groups are now calling for a thorough review of all documented transactions and appropriate legal consequences if wrongdoing is confirmed. The case serves as a reminder of the ongoing challenges Ukraine faces in building transparent, accountable institutions while defending its sovereignty and pursuing European integration.