In the past few days, there has been a surge of reports in the Ukrainian press and on various Telegram channels regarding the criminal case of Ukrainian scientist Dr. Oleg Maltsev. This reached its peak on September 23, 2024, when the Security Service of Ukraine declared that they had “neutralized an operational combat group of the Russian GRU”. Even former Ukrainian politicians who are currently in Russia, hiding from Ukrainian justice, felt it necessary to contribute their ‘two cents’. Essentially, everyone joined in on the chaotic information frenzy, sharing their ‘expert opinions.’ This ‘media spectacle’ certainly piqued our curiosity, as Oleg Maltsev has been labeled a traitor to Ukraine, a saboteur, an ‘info gypsy,’ a cult leader, a pseudoscientist, and even a ‘Templar’ by many. Our journalists had never encountered such a multifaceted individual before, and the whirlwind of criticism is undeniably intriguing. Consequently, we sought to hear the other side and contacted Oleg Maltsev’s lawyer, Yevgeniya Tarasenko. What we found out is detailed below.
Reporter: Yevgeniya, as the lawyer for Oleg Maltsev, can you explain what happened? Can you comment on the statements circulating in the media and Telegram channels regarding this case?
Yevgeniya Tarasenko: On September 12, my client was accused of crimes under two articles of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. He is currently held in the Odessa pre-trial detention center, and a pre-trial investigation is ongoing. Regarding the media reports and posts on Telegram, it’s evident that there has been a leak of information because there is a principle known as the secrecy of pre-trial investigations. While law enforcement may share information about their activities, such as arrests, they should do so without disclosing the names and images of the suspects. As an attorney, I must emphasize that the law in Ukraine has long prohibited the disclosure of information related to ongoing investigations, grounded in the presumption of innocence. However, the case of Oleg Maltsev has sparked a media frenzy, with various online platforms filled with names, images, and wild theories. Among the more absurd claims, one Telegram channel reported that weapons were seized, which Maltsev allegedly intended to use to capture Odessa. However, the accompanying photo featured only sleeping bags and knives. This naturally led many to question: Was Maltsev really planning to take Odessa with such items? It is evident that there has been a leak of information here. I suspect this leak was deliberate, coming from the pre-trial investigation agency. This indicates that someone disseminated this information to unreliable, sensationalist Telegram channels and the media.
Reporter: What purpose does it serve?
Yevgeniya Tarasenko: It’s difficult for me to pinpoint the exact purpose behind this. I can only offer my thoughts. One notable aspect is that this practice has been entrenched in Ukraine for a considerable period. After a person is arrested, the media tends to harshly defame them. Why does this happen? I believe it’s intended to create psychological pressure—primarily on judges and the suspect’s associates. Everyone has a social circle, and the intention is to make those individuals withdraw, leaving the person isolated. The goal is to instill such fear that they hesitate to even visit the detention center to bring something as simple as a pack of cigarettes. This tactic has been in practice for a long time.
Moreover, I can point out that Ukraine has an unspoken notion of a ‘favorite article’ that individuals try to avoid at all costs. This is indicative of a sort of ‘current demand’ (or trend). It all began over 15 years ago with Article 212 of the Criminal Code (Tax evasion), when businessmen were taken into custody on tax evasion charges. It was truly a severe article, as some businessmen ended up in detention for multiple years.
Let’s be clear: tax evasion isn’t the same as murder, nor is it like a maniac like Chikatilo who terrorizes the city. Why, then, should someone be kept in pre-trial detention for it? It’s obvious that many have taken advantage of this, including corrupt law enforcement personnel. This isn’t just my view; if all law enforcement in Ukraine were truly ethical, we wouldn’t have needed to reform the law enforcement and judicial systems in 2014, nor would we see criminal cases involving bribery, abuse of power, and so forth.
Several years later, after the abolition of detention for tax evasion, Article 190 (Fraud) became the new ‘favorite article.’ People were again taken into custody, publicly branded as ‘scammers,’ their connections were driven away, and others became hesitant to greet them in public.
Following 2014, the Article 191 (Misappropriation, embezzlement, or possession of property) marked a new phase. Concurrently, a movement to fight corruption began, but it also saw its share of abuses.
Let me share an illustrative example. I had a friend who worked as a judge. One morning, I checked the Internet and saw that all the major news outlets reported she had been arrested for taking a bribe right in the courtroom, complete with photos. I tried calling her, but her phone was disconnected. After two hours, she returned my call. It turned out she had traveled to Europe with her son a week earlier and had no idea she had been “detained for a bribe.”
Reporter: Everyone has become accustomed to it. Corruption is invincible.
Yevgeniya Tarasenko: Corruption has always been present and will persist in any state, unfortunately. The next ‘favorite article’ arose during the COVID-19 pandemic, marked by the rise of fake COVID tests and vaccination certificates. These offenses became some of the most serious at the time, prompting the State Bureau of Investigation to take action, even though they were typically under the jurisdiction of local law enforcement. There were notable arrests, often supported by SBU officers. Then, as the war began, COVID suddenly disappeared—not just in Ukraine, but worldwide. This dangerous illness seemed to evaporate in a single day. A new trend emerged, driven by the current demands—crimes against Ukraine’s national security foundations.
What can we say? In every political era, law enforcement agencies have a ‘favorite article,’ and the trend shifts quickly. Take the judge who presided over Yulia Tymoshenko’s trial and found her guilty—soon after, he himself became a fugitive in Ukraine, while Tymoshenko was freed. It’s a revolving door of justice.
Reporter: Let me clarify. Does a ‘favorite article’ refer to one that can be monetized?
Yevgeniya Tarasenko: Yes, including that. We can talk about it openly, as many verdicts have been issued against law enforcement officers for accepting bribes and extorting money. However, it’s not just about money—the ‘favorite article’ also reflects a political agenda of the time, tied to the state’s internal policy. Didn’t we have spies and traitors in Ukraine prior to 2022? It’s hard to believe they only appeared on February 24, 2022. I barely remember any convictions for such cases before then. This reflects the political agenda of the moment.
Reporter: After hearing your thoughts, I’m curious: why do you believe Oleg Maltsev has become a target for persecution, at least in the media? According to his Ukrainian Wikipedia page, he appears to be involved purely in scientific endeavors. Is there more to it?
Yevgeniya Tarasenko: This is just my subjective perspective, but when someone is dragged through the mud constantly, it raises suspicion that it might be a coordinated effort (a setup). Normally, news about a detention appears on two or three platforms, and within a few days, it’s forgotten. But when nearly the entire Ukrainian media, along with Russian and European sources, are preoccupied with an academic in the middle of a war, it suggests that there’s more to it—likely a planned operation. There’s no other way to explain it.
It’s worth mentioning that in early December of last year, Oleg Maltsev’s colleague, attorney Olga Panchenko, received a letter from an unidentified email address. The letter stated that the Military Counterintelligence Department of the SBU was carrying out operational and investigative actions against Maltsev and offered to ‘resolve all issues for a certain compensation.’ On one hand, it seemed like a scam. We have no information about the sender, but two months later, in February 2024, the initial searches occurred at Maltsev’s home.
Reporter: Were you directly offered to pay somebody?Yevgeniya Tarasenko: I’m providing you with a screenshot of this letter. I am aware that Oleg Maltsev was made aware of it, and his lawyer, Panchenko, submitted a complaint to the SBU. Notably, Oleg Maltsev was abroad at the time and could have simply chosen not to return to Ukraine. When Maltsev was given a measure of restraint on September 13, the prosecution argued that if he were not taken into custody, there was a risk he would flee from the court and the investigation. I am confident that after receiving such letters, he could have easily chosen not to return to Ukraine, yet he did. And the initial searches at Maltsev’s residence took place in early March 2024, but he was not detained and charged until September 12. This means that if he had intended to ‘hide,’ he had six months to do so. Based on the current media coverage about him, it appears he could have crossed the border without any issues.
Reporter: Can you elaborate on the narrative that the investigation has and what is being exaggerated in the media? What is the current situation? I would like to hear only the facts, with no speculation involved.
Yevgeniya Tarasenko: Concerning the investigation and its specifics, I am unable to disclose anything, as this falls under the secrecy of the pre-trial investigation. You may request comments from the investigator or prosecutor, but they, too, are restricted from sharing this information. However, I can discuss matters that are already public and available, which are exempt from pre-trial secrecy.
Maltsev is charged with establishing an illegal paramilitary formation. To support this claim, various Telegram channels have circulated a list of weapons confiscated from his residence, which were actually seized on March 1, 2024. It’s important to highlight that I currently possess five court rulings stating that these weapons should be returned to their owner, yet these decisions have not been executed even after six months. All confiscated weapons are registered in accordance with the procedures mandated by law, meaning that for each seized unit, Maltsev possesses a permit issued by the National Police of Ukraine. The majority of these weapons are smoothbore and were utilized for training in the Olympic discipline of Skeet (clay shooting).
Furthermore, Oleg Maltsev holds the position of head of the International Tactical Sport Shooting Association and participates in the Olympic discipline of Skeet. While training in Skeet, Maltsev also conducted scientific research, resulting in four published books, all of which are available on his official website. These books have received reviews from both Ukrainian and foreign athletes. Therefore, as his defender, it is evident to me that he did not establish an ‘illegal paramilitary formation.’ This individual is involved in sports, possesses officially registered weapons, and works as a researcher, producing tangible results. This is not mere rhetoric—there are concrete achievements to demonstrate his work. What kind of illegal armed group are we even discussing here?
* * *
Concerning the claims that Maltsev aimed to capture Odessa, I will be succinct and refer to journalist Stanislav Dombrovsky: “Maltsev was unable to even take a parking lot from the mayor’s office; what kind of takeover of Odessa is being mentioned?”
Moreover, throughout the past year, Maltsev has attempted to be implicated under several articles of the Criminal Code of Ukraine—specifically Articles 111, 369, 263, 436-2, and 361-2. Since March 2024, he has been under investigation, with searches conducted that led to the confiscation of items such as an Iqos electronic cigarette and a Parker pen, which are allegedly identified as means for covert information gathering. As you understand, these items were sent for examination, which is a misuse of state budget funds. They even confiscated Maltsev’s suitcase—what relevance does it have to the alleged crime? Was he planning to seize power with this suitcase?
In addition, more than 10,000 euros’ worth of photographic gear went missing following the search of his residence in early March 2024. The apartment was empty, and the door was forcibly opened, even though the whereabouts of the owners were known. The Unified register of pre-trial investigations (ERDR) was logged regarding this matter, but no progress has been made. The investigator is rejecting requests from Maltsev’s representatives to question the individuals who were present during the search, despite this being the first logical step to take.
Since March 2024, all of Maltsev’s scientific activities have essentially come to a halt, with employees facing pressure. The searches conducted on September 12 mainly took place at locations that had already been searched in March 2024, indicating a redundancy in the operations. Ultimately, Maltsev is being charged under two articles. We can at least ‘express gratitude’ that he has not been implicated in the entirety of the special part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. Considering the amount of time and effort involved, it appears that Maltsev is the top criminal in Ukraine. Are you serious?
Considering everything mentioned, I believe this is a coordinated effort and a setup. I believe there are parties with vested interests—unethical law enforcement officers who mislead their colleagues and “add fuel to the fire” not out of altruism. There are always individuals within the law enforcement system who exploit the power granted to them by the state for their own personal and selfish gains. This does not imply that everyone in that system operates in this manner.
Reporter: What can you say regarding the allegations that Maltsev is a ‘pseudoscientist’?
Yevgeniya Tarasenko: Maltsev is a two-time PhD candidate in Ukraine, holding degrees in both philosophy and psychology. He has successfully defended two PhD theses. While it’s easy for self-proclaimed experts online, who likely haven’t ventured beyond basic reading, to dismiss him as a ‘pseudoscientist,’ I trust that the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine has a more informed perspective. Prior to his detention, Maltsev was actively engaged in his work, regularly collaborating with fellow scientists internationally. There is an abundance of videos from international conferences available to the public showcasing this. He has an unprecedented number of joint scientific publications with American and European researchers. I firmly believe that esteemed scientists like Prof. Jerome Krase are better positioned to assess whether Maltsev is competent in his field.
Moreover, I will share a list with you—this is an estimated catalog of Maltsev’s scientific works from the last decade, totaling eight pages of printed text. Please take a look at it. Can you identify any scientist in Ukraine who matches Maltsev’s number of publications in Scopus? Is there a Ukrainian researcher who is regarded with the same level of esteem internationally? It’s important to highlight that for the past 20 years, Maltsev has not received any funding from the Ukrainian budget; he conducts all his research at his own expense.
What baffles me the most is what Ukraine has gained from this situation. Maltsev possesses unparalleled connections in the scientific community in Europe and the United States, along with a strong reputation among his foreign colleagues. Now, he is being unjustly vilified and remains in a pre-trial detention center. Has Ukraine truly benefited from this, or have our enemies? This question is rhetorical.
* * *
Reporter: Wikipedia mentions that Maltsev had a conflict with the Russian Orthodox Church and a particular ‘anti-cult movement.’ Could this be related to the current situation he faces?
Yevgeniya Tarasenko: I don’t have any information on this matter. I can’t assert that this is an ‘order’ from the Russian Orthodox Church, as I lack evidence. However, those who witnessed the conflict between Maltsev and the ROC recall instances where he was run off the road and labeled a ‘cultist’ in both Russian and Ukrainian media. This campaign lasted for several years.
In 2019, a feature-documentary titled ‘License for Crimes’ was released, which critiques Russia’s operational methods against neighboring countries, including Ukraine. This film is mentioned on Ukrainian Wikipedia, is accessible for free on YouTube, and was officially presented at a press conference held by ‘Unian,’ where Maltsev’s colleague from Belgium was in attendance.
Ironically, the materials from this movie are currently being used against Maltsev, which is inherently absurd.
I am aware that the so-called ‘anti-cult movement’ has harassed Maltsev’s European colleagues, who stood alongside him against Russian religious extremism in Europe and Ukraine. These European scientists and human rights activists, who worked with Maltsev to prevent this contagion from spreading in Ukraine before 2022, are now facing informational attacks by agents of the Russian Orthodox Church. Who benefits from this? Once again, this question is rhetorical.
Reporter: I can see that you don’t believe in Maltsev’s guilt. However, the saying goes, “there’s no smoke without fire.” What do you think?
Yevgeniya Tarasenko: I would suggest that this has repeated itself in history. Sergei Korolev was jailed, Nikolai Kozyrev was in prison, Stefan Taranushenko faced incarceration, and now Maltsev is experiencing the same fate.
It’s important to note that all of them were imprisoned on politically motivated charges, labeled as ‘enemies of the people’ who deserved execution without trial. Later, those same individuals called for accountability against those responsible for sending these scientists to the camps. This pattern has occurred before. History tends to repeat itself.
Nevertheless, given the current secrecy of the pre-trial investigation, I am unable to provide any additional information at this stage. My colleagues and I will persist in our efforts on the case and trust that, eventually, the pieces will come together.
List of scientific works of Academician Maltsev at the link.
Sourсe: Scientific and Popular Journal ‘Granite of Science‘
