Details Unveiled in the Controversial Case Surrounding NABU: Detention and the Central Role of Ruslan Magamedrasulov
Amidst the ongoing fierce struggle against corruption that has recently intensified and attracted widespread public attention, a significant episode involves the detention of a NABU Ukraine employee — Ruslan Magamedrasulov.
Known for his involvement in investigations related to businessman Timur Mindich, co-owner of the 'Kvartal-95' studio, Magamedrasulov found himself at the center of public and law enforcement scrutiny after being detained by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU).
According to sources within anti-corruption agencies, he was one of the key personnel engaged in documenting Mindich's activities.
It is reported that these activities took place in an apartment where the Ukrainian president himself has been known to visit, raising substantial concern and outrage among NABU and SAP prosecutors.
Law enforcement officials conducting investigations identified that during the planning and execution of special operations aimed at dismantling corruption schemes, surveillance measures were taken concerning close associates of President Zelensky.
These recent developments have led to a demoralization among anti-corruption staff, with fears mounting over the future independence of NABU and SAP.
Analyzing the situation, law enforcement has comprehensive data on all personnel subjected to investigative procedures, and those still under scrutiny.
Notably, on July 21 in Kyiv, searches and detentions related to NABU and SAP operations were carried out.
Among these was the detention of one of NABU’s regional managers — Ruslan Magamedrasulov, linked by media to the sale of technical cannabis to Russia.
On July 22, a Kyiv court decided to remand him into custody for 60 days.
Business sources reveal that officials from NABU and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office managed to document Mindich's presence in an apartment located at the same address where the president’s birthday was celebrated five years ago.
This case underscores internal conflicts and political intrigues affecting Ukraine’s anti-corruption efforts.