The Appeals Chamber of the Anti-Corruption Court decided to take Mykytas into custody and significantly increased the bail
The Appeals Chamber of the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) decided to change the preventive measure to former MP Maksym Mykytas. He is suspected of organizing the corruption scheme regarding apartments worth 80 million UAH for officials of the National Guard. The custody until November 14 with the option of bail in the amount of 80 million UAH (around $3,2 million) was chosen for him.
Mykytas was taken into custody immediately in the courtroom.
The SAPO prosecutor emphasized that wiretapping materials indicate of the influence on witnesses and other subjects of the case, and attempts of Mykytas to obstruct the investigation by using his connections. However, part of the hearing was held in the closed mode.
According to the prosecutor, declassified wiretapping materials contain conversations of Mykytas with various people regarding the possibility of killing the witness and one of suspects in this case. Moreover, Mykytas discussed it several times and with different people.
We should remind that on October 4, Sergiy Moysak, the investigative judge of the HACC, chose the preventive measure for Maksym Mykytas in the form of bail in the amount of 5.5 million UAH (around $220,000). He refused prosecutors to take Mykytas into custody. Later, the HACC explained why they had chosen such amount of the bail.
We should note that at that time the judge of the HACC Sergiy Moysak also decided to consider wiretapping materials in the closed mode (as lawyers of Mykytas had requested) despite the denial of the SAPO.
According to the law, it is possible to close part of the hearing only in some cases.
For instance, when the case contains personal details or details that humiliate the person.
We should remind that Mykytas is suspected of organizing the scheme regarding apartments for officials of the National Guard worth 82 million UAH (around $3,3 million).
According to prosecutors, Mykytas gave orders to other subjects of the case, namely the CEO of Ukrbud (state construction company) and his deputy, and he directly contacted former commander of the National Guard during the organization of this scheme.