Yermak thanked everyone who contributed to raising the required bail amount, saying that “justice is worth fighting for.”
“I continue to insist on my innocence and deny all accusations against me. I respect the law and will continue defending my position and reputation exclusively through legal means,” he wrote.
Yermak said he had not fled and had no intention of doing so. He said he would remain in Ukraine and continue “working for the benefit of the state, helping the military, prisoners of war and people who need support.”
The Andriy Yermak case
On May 11, Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau and Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office announced suspicion notices against former presidential office chief Andriy Yermak. Investigators suspect him of involvement in a group allegedly linked to laundering 460 million hryvnias through construction projects in the elite Kyiv suburb of Kozyn tied to the Dynastiya cooperative. Prosecutors classified the alleged actions under Part 3 of Article 209 of Ukraine’s Criminal Code, covering money laundering.
Yermak denies the allegations and says he does not own a house in the Dynastiya cooperative. His lawyer called the accusations “groundless.”
On May 14, Ukraine’s High Anti-Corruption Court ordered Yermak held in custody with the option of 140 million hryvnias in bail. He was taken into custody in the courtroom. The former presidential office chief said he did not have such funds but had “many friends” and would try to raise the amount.
On the evening of May 15, Yermak’s lawyer Ihor Fomin said the required bail amount had already been raised, but could not yet be transferred because banks were closed. The funds were expected to be credited once financial institutions resumed operations.
Yermak was released from pretrial detention on May 18 after the 140 million hryvnia bail was paid.
A source at the High Anti-Corruption Court told NV that around 300 individuals and legal entities contributed to Yermak’s bail payment. Typically, bail payments involve only a handful or several dozen contributors. According to the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, many of those involved are not public figures, meaning the court is not legally permitted to disclose their names.