Procurement runs through NABU's latest cases, from drones to subway cars

Ukraine's National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) have announced four cases since mid-August, covering drones, subway cars, a border guard tender and purchases by two state companies, in which investigators allege inflated prices, predetermined winners or bribes in state and municipal purchasing. The alleged losses in three of them, as stated by NABU, add up to more than UAH 418 million. All four rest on notices of suspicion, not verdicts.

The four cases

On 13 August, NABU said the estimated losses in a 2023 drone procurement at the State Service of Special Communications and Information Protection had risen from UAH 90 million to UAH 254 million. Officials allegedly signed additional contracts in September 2023 for 500 DJI Mavic 3T, 2,000 DJI Mavic 3 Pro and 900 DJI Matrice M30T drones at prices 60 to 90 per cent above market rates, with winners decided in advance and other companies controlled by the organisers used to simulate competition. NABU said more than USD 4 million held in foreign company accounts and UAH 17 million in Ukraine have been seized.

On 15 September, NABU said a group took UAH 137.5 million from Kyiv Metro through an inflated freight-forwarding contract. Warsaw Metro had offered 60 subway cars free of charge in late 2022, and a pre-selected company won the 2023 tenders to deliver them with a transport price of UAH 190 million, which NABU describes as significantly inflated. Seven people are suspected, among them one former and three current Kyiv Metro officials. The State Audit Service helped the pre-trial investigation, the release says.

On 23 September, NABU served new notices in a case over a State Border Guard Service tender. In August 2025 a drone manufacturer won the tender with a lower price, and a competitor that expected to win through its connections allegedly demanded USD 1 million from the winner, with border guard officials, to ensure smooth contract signing and acceptance of the equipment. The competitor also allegedly paid 50,000 USDT, worth more than UAH 2.1 million at the National Bank's rate, to an official. NABU alleges that the official converted more than UAH 15.4 million into USDT between January and April 2026.

On 13 October, NABU named 10 suspects in a scheme that allegedly cost Ukrzaliznytsia and Forests of Ukraine more than UAH 26.8 million. They are described as members of a "shadow office" in Kyiv and officials of the state companies, and one is an active officer of the Security Service. At Forests of Ukraine, metal pallets and plastic crates were allegedly bought at inflated prices between May and December 2024, a loss of over UAH 21.5 million. At Ukrzaliznytsia, power transformers were allegedly bought at inflated prices between September 2023 and May 2025, a loss of over UAH 5.2 million.

What links them

The mechanisms differ but the pattern is consistent in NABU's accounts. In the SSSCIP and Kyiv Metro cases, a favoured supplier allegedly won what looked like open competition, and in both the proceeds were moved to entities abroad, according to the drone case release and the Kyiv Metro release. In the Ukrzaliznytsia and Forests of Ukraine case, companies controlled by the organisers allegedly received the overpayments. In the border guard case, the alleged leverage was a bribe demand on a legitimate winner rather than a price distortion, and the laundering ran through crypto assets.

Defence and security buyers feature heavily. NABU's first-half report, published on 10 August, listed among its cases the theft of UAH 32 million at Ukroboronprom and a demand for a USD 1 million bribe to finalise an FPV drone contract, the report shows. The same report counted 360 new cases and 107 persons served with notices of suspicion in the first six months of 2026.

Limits of the record

None of the releases names the suspects, and NABU notes in each, including the Kyiv Metro and Ukrzaliznytsia releases, that under Article 62 of the Constitution of Ukraine a person is presumed innocent until a court finds otherwise. The Kyiv Metro, border guard and Ukrzaliznytsia releases do not mention preventive measures or court dates. The special communications service case is the only one in which the release reports seizures. How far the pattern points to weaknesses in procurement rules rather than in individual conduct is a question the prosecutions will test in court, not one the releases answer.