Chernyshev Bail The Ukrainian Phenomenon of Justice

In Ukraine, the amount of bail in criminal cases — especially involving high-ranking officials and high-profile corruption charges — is not only astonishing in scale but also significantly differs from European practices. The recent case of Vice Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov, for whom the High Anti-Corruption Court set bail at UAH 120 million, illustrates how bail in Ukraine often transforms from a procedural safeguard into a de facto punishment before any verdict is rendered.

Bail in Ukraine: Legal Nature and European Standards  
Bail, under both domestic law and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) jurisprudence, is a preventive measure, not a punishment. Its goal is to ensure the suspect appears in court — not to recover damages or impose penal consequences. However, in Ukraine, especially in high-profile cases, the bail amount often exceeds the alleged damage, contradicting European standards and becoming a tool of pressure.

“There is a systemic issue in Ukraine of imposing excessively high bail amounts. This denies suspects the chance to be released, effectively violating the human right to liberty…”

Record-High Bails in Ukraine: Figures and Comparisons
Ukraine has repeatedly set European record bails:

• Yevhen Bakulin (former head of Naftogaz) — UAH 1.5 billion (the largest in Ukraine’s judicial history)
• Oleksandr Katsuba — UAH 450 million
• Andriy Kobolyev — over UAH 229 million
• Oleksiy Chernyshov — UAH 120 million

In contrast, in most EU countries, even in corruption or economic crime cases, bail rarely exceeds a few million euros. In Ukraine, amounts in the hundreds of millions of hryvnias have become common among top officials.

Bail as Punishment: How It Works

Scenario 1: The Person Cannot Post Bail      
If the suspect cannot afford the astronomical sum, they are detained in pre-trial custody (SIZO), which is effectively pre-judgment incarceration. This contradicts the presumption of innocence and the ECHR requirement for individual assessment based on financial capacity.

“Excessive bail also has a secondary, yet powerful effect: it pushes suspects toward plea deals or abandoning their legal defense…”

Scenario 2: The Person Posts Bail       
If the suspect does manage to raise the bail, it becomes a media event. Journalists and the public scrutinize the origin of the funds, adding pressure and creating suspicions about the money’s legality. This becomes another tool for discrediting the accused, regardless of case outcome.

“Media outlets treat these excessive bail amounts as a form of ‘temporary liability,’ distorting the legal function of bail and encouraging court politicization.”

Causes of Excessive Bail in Ukraine

• Political and public demand for “symbolic justice”
• Lack of a systemic approach in bail assessment
• Bail used as a tool of pressure — procedurally and in the media

In Ukraine, bail amounts in top cases often range from UAH 50 million to UAH 500 million — vastly surpassing EU levels. For example:

• In Germany — typically under €2 million
• In France — from €50,000 to €1 million, with courts required to assess financial status
• In Poland — usually under PLN 500,000, also adjusted to income and resources

Thus, European courts approach bail with individualized care, balancing procedural needs and human rights. Excessive or punitive bail is rare — and seen as a human rights violation.

In Ukraine, however, high bails have become systemic, especially in media-driven cases. Bail no longer ensures court appearance but rather serves as pressure or pretrial punishment.

Conclusions

• Bail amounts in the hundreds of millions are the norm in Ukrainian corruption cases
• Excessive bail acts as either a punitive tool or source of public pressure
• This practice violates both European standards and criminal procedural intent
• Reform is needed: case-by-case financial assessments, legal education, new court mindset

Ukraine’s “bail as punishment” model is not just a legal defect — it is a deep social issue that requires public and judicial rethinking.

Below is a video from the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC), where the WINNER law firm team is defending a client under Part 5 of Article 191 and Part 3 of Article 209 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.