"This is no longer just a legal manipulation — it’s a departure from common sense," says lawyer about the case against GNT Group co-owner

This is stated in a major investigation published on the Censor website. Naumenko’s lawyer calls the charges of fraud and document forgery absurd and politically motivated.

The high-profile case revolves around a dispute between Ukrainian businessmen and two credit funds registered in the Cayman Islands. The creditors claim that the co-owners of GNT Group never intended to repay the loan. The businessmen respond that they were diligently paying interest, but the war changed everything — and the funds used the situation to carry out a corporate raid on their assets.

"The charges against Naumenko are absurd, and his basic rights as a Ukrainian citizen are being ignored," said lawyer Oleksandr Zubrytskyi. According to him, the investigation claims that Naumenko never intended to repay the loan from the beginning, but this version falls apart under scrutiny.

"During the first year after receiving the loan, about $3 million was paid in interest alone. According to Supreme Court precedent, partial repayment of a loan directly excludes the qualification of such actions as fraud," Zubrytskyi explains.

Collateral worth over $320 million was pledged for the loan — 16 times more than the loan amount itself. "Why would anyone provide collateral worth 16 times the size of the loan if their intention was to fraudulently appropriate the funds?" the defense lawyer asks rhetorically.

Another charge brought by the investigation is the alleged forgery of warehouse documents for grain. However, as the lawyers emphasize, this claim contradicts the findings of audits conducted by Cotenca, a company engaged by the creditors themselves. The inspections were carried out at least three times over two years and each time confirmed the presence of the goods. Moreover, as the lawyer underscores, "Naumenko was neither an official nor a company officer — his signature does not appear on any of the documents considered to be falsified."

The defense insists that the case is purely commercial in nature but is being artificially criminalized. Some Ukrainian courts have already recognized signs of a civil-commercial relationship, yet the criminal case for fraud has not been substantively reviewed.

The situation is further complicated by Naumenko’s deteriorating health. According to the defense, during three months in pre-trial detention, he received no medical assistance, despite having a diagnosed condition incompatible with incarceration. The Court of Appeal ordered a cardiological examination, but as of early August, it had not been conducted.

A complaint has already been accepted for consideration by the European Court of Human Rights. "Naumenko v. Ukraine" — that is the title of the new case in Strasbourg, which will be reviewed under a priority procedure.

The defense also reports signs of pressure: the suspect has been denied family visits, and prosecutorial motions are scheduled for court hearings less than an hour after being filed.

At the same time, some positive signals are emerging. The court denied the request for a preventive measure against Serhii Groza — another co-owner of GNT Group and Naumenko’s business partner — recognizing that the case bore signs of a commercial, not criminal, dispute. Groza remains in custody.