★★★★★ 5.0 ON GOOGLE · CLIENT REVIEWS | AVAILABLE 24/7
Illicit enrichment is one of the most high-profile corruption crimes and is a direct blow to trust in state power. In Ukraine, this crime (Art. 368-5 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) is a cornerstone of anti-corruption legislation and provides that an official has acquired assets whose value cannot be explained by their lawful income. An accusation under this article can have catastrophic consequences, including the confiscation of property and actual imprisonment.
In this article, a criminal lawyer will reveal the legal essence of this crime, the specifics of the investigation, which is often conducted by NABU, as well as the main defense strategies for those who have faced such accusations.
According to the Criminal Code, illicit enrichment is the acquisition of assets by an official when the lawfulness of the grounds for their origin is not confirmed by evidence and when their value significantly exceeds official income. The investigation of such cases falls within the jurisdiction of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU).
The objects of the crime (assets) may include:
Financial funds: Cash, money in bank accounts, investment funds.
Real estate: Apartments, houses, land plots.
Business assets: Corporate rights, shares, securities.
Valuable property: Expensive cars, works of art, jewelry.
The following facts may initiate criminal proceedings under this article:
The detection of significant assets that clearly do not correspond to the declared or official income of the official.
The results of journalistic investigations or statements by civic organizations.
Analytical materials collected by anti-corruption bodies.
Cases of illicit enrichment require a specific and in-depth analysis of financial flows. The procedural order includes several important stages.
After the initiation of a pre-trial investigation, the investigation scrupulously gathers evidence. One of the most important instruments is a financial examination, which helps to confirm or refute the discrepancy. It usually covers:
Analysis of all bank accounts (of the suspect and family members).
Verification of the sources of financial receipts (dividends, loans, inheritance).
Assessment of the real market value of the acquired property.
Detection of hidden schemes, in particular the use of offshore companies, for evasion of declaration.
Legal defense in such cases is a multi-stage process that requires a deep knowledge of anti-corruption legislation and experience of working with financial documents.
Analysis of the Evidence Base. First of all, the lawyer studies in detail all the materials collected by NABU to make sure of their admissibility and sufficiency.
Proving the Lawfulness of the Origin. The main strategy is to gather irrefutable evidence confirming the legality of the acquisition of the assets:
Contracts on the sale of previous property.
Inheritance documents or gift agreements.
Financial documents on income from business, investments or dividends.
Challenging the Classification. Using the specific criteria of Art. 368-5 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine to argue that the client’s actions lack the necessary elements of the corpus delicti or that they are not its subject.
Procedural Violations. Searching for any violations committed by the investigation when gathering evidence (inadmissible evidence), which may become grounds for dropping the charges.
International Practice. Referring to the practice of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which clearly emphasizes the presumption of innocence and the prosecution’s obligation to prove all the circumstances of the crime.
Challenging Seizures. Initiating the process of lifting the seizures of property imposed within the framework of the criminal proceedings by proving the lawful origin of these assets.
In cases where the evidence against the suspect is quite substantial, concluding an agreement with the investigation can become a pragmatic and effective instrument for mitigating the punishment.
An agreement may have the following key aspects:
Mitigation of Liability. The opportunity to avoid imprisonment or to significantly reduce the amount of the fine.
Return of Assets. Voluntary confiscation of illicitly acquired property in exchange for more favorable terms.
Cooperation. Providing information about other, larger-scale corruption schemes and the persons involved in them.
Speeding Up the Process. A quick completion of the court process and avoidance of protracted proceedings.
The lawyer plays a decisive role in preparing such an agreement, helping the client to objectively assess the risks and negotiate the best terms with the prosecution.
An effective legal defense in cases of illicit enrichment requires a comprehensive, thorough, professional approach and a careful study of every financial document. Our goal is the use of all legal mechanisms, from proving the lawful origin of assets to the application of ECtHR precedents, in order to significantly increase the client’s chances of a positive result.
Corruption is a cancerous tumor that continues to corrode Ukrainian society, undermining economic stability and trust in state institutions. It is no coincidence that Ukraine steadily shows low positions in the Corruption Perceptions Index (Transparency International). The main problems come down to abuse of official position and extortion of an undue advantage.
In this article, we will conduct a detailed legal analysis of a key instrument for combating this phenomenon, Article 368 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which provides for punishment for receiving an undue advantage (so-called bribes) by officials.
Article 368 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine plays a critically important role. It punishes not only the actual receipt of an undue advantage, but also the acceptance of an offer or promise to provide it. This significantly expands the possibilities of law enforcement bodies to investigate and hold accountable officials who abuse their powers for the sake of illicit enrichment.
The Supreme Court, in its rulings (for example, in case No. 726/776/17), clearly indicates: members of collegial bodies (for example, commissions, councils) who receive an advantage for voting are subjects of the crime under Art. 368 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In this case, it does not matter what the final result of the vote was, positive or negative for the person giving the bribe. Criminal liability arises for the very fact of receiving the advantage, and not for the success of achieving the desired result.
A successful fight against corruption requires a precise distinction between crimes that are similar in their external features.
Undue Advantage (Art. 368 of the CCU): Consists in receiving a reward for specific actions or inaction within official powers.
Illicit Enrichment (Art. 368-5 of the CCU): Consists in the acquisition by an official of assets whose origin they cannot confirm with official income. This crime does not require proving that the assets were received specifically for a particular official action. It is considered completed from the moment of the acquisition of the assets.
Undue Advantage (Art. 368 of the CCU): The subject receives an advantage for their own actions or inaction as an official.
Abuse of Influence (Art. 369-2 of the CCU): A person receives an advantage for a promise to influence the decision of another official who has the powers to make that decision. In this case, the subject does not exercise their own official duties.
Undue Advantage (Art. 368 of the CCU): An official demands, accepts or agrees to accept an advantage.
Provocation of Bribery (Art. 370 of the CCU): The initiative comes from the other party with the aim of inducing an official to commit a crime, even if they had no intention of committing it. This is punishable regardless of whether the official was induced to commit the crime.
A lawyer working in this category of cases faces unique procedural and substantive legal difficulties.
Proving the Absence of Intent. Since the subjective side requires direct intent, the lawyer needs to prove that the client did not realize the unlawfulness of their actions or did not have a conscious desire to receive an advantage. This is extremely difficult, since intent is an internal conviction.
Countering Covert Investigative Actions (CIA). In most cases, audio and video recordings (wiretapping, hidden filming) are used. The task of the defense is to carefully check the lawfulness of obtaining these materials and compliance with all the procedural norms of the CPC. A violation of the procedure can render the evidence inadmissible.
Pressure from the Media and the Public. Corruption cases always attract increased media attention, which creates external pressure on the investigation and the court. The defender must ensure an objective consideration of the case, defending the client’s rights regardless of the prevailing public opinion.
Ambiguity of Classification. In some cases, the actions of the suspect can be interpreted in different ways (for example, whether the receipt of the advantage was connected specifically with official duties, or whether it was abuse of influence). The lawyer must argue that the actions do not correspond to the corpus delicti under Art. 368 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
An effective defense in these cases is built on the high professionalism of the lawyer, a thorough knowledge of legislation and the ability to counter the pressure of the investigation, ensuring compliance with the rights of the client at all stages of the criminal proceedings.
It is the acquisition of assets whose lawful basis a person cannot confirm, when their size significantly exceeds the person’s lawful income.
Liability for the acceptance of an undue advantage by an official is provided for in Article 368 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
Often a key one: economic and financial examinations help to establish the real size of assets and income and to assess the conclusions of the investigation.
In some cases yes, it can reduce the punishment, but its expediency depends on the circumstances of the case, so you should first consult a lawyer.
On the analysis of the evidence base, the lawfulness of the sources of assets and procedural violations by the investigation. The lawyer determines an effective strategy individually.
Author: Ilona Melnychuk, attorney In Brief You can dissolve a marriage through the registry office (DRATS, the body for the state registration of civil status
The “Lexon” attorney secured the complete cancellation of a resolution imposing a fine under part 2 of Article 122 of the Code of Ukraine on
It happens more often than it seems: one day you suddenly find out about the existence of a court decision issued in a case you
Grand changes await the Ukrainian business environment. As of August 28, 2025, the Commercial Code of Ukraine loses its force. This is not just a
Buying real estate is always a serious step that requires not only significant financial investment, but also thorough legal verification. To avoid unpleasant surprises, it
Buying real estate has always been a responsible step, and in the conditions of 2025, when economic instability and wartime risks intensify fraudulent schemes, it
