Ukraine is currently immersed in one of its most significant wartime corruption scandals since Russia's invasion three years ago. This turmoil started when investigators conducted raids on the residences of senior officials and a former business associate of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, probing a vast corruption network within the nation's energy sector.
Last week, Ukraine's leading anti-corruption agencies revealed the discovery of a "high-level" scheme involving corruption at Energoatom, the state nuclear energy company.
According to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, evidence suggests that this operation generated kickbacks totaling $100 million from contractors responsible for safeguarding Ukraine's energy infrastructure against Russian attacks.
Istanbul’s public prosecutors have announced the confiscation of the COINO Crypto Asset Platform, along with 15 additional entities, on accusations of money laundering. They stated that COINO was allegedly employed as an intermediary in the laundering of illicit funds presumed to be linked to the suspects and their family members, whose assets have been seized under the jurisdiction of the Istanbul Criminal Court of Peace.
The prosecutors estimated that the cryptocurrency transactions involved could be valued at approximately $770 million. It was further revealed that 645 out of 802 individuals who accessed funds from the company's accounts had ties to offenses such as illegal betting, fraud, and misuse of banking instruments; 172 of whom have already been subject to investigations or legal actions, with additional ongoing inquiries against both private persons and firms involved in similar illicit money transfers to the company's accounts.
Chainalysis has reported that by 2025, Turkey is expected to emerge as a significant player in the cryptocurrency market, with annual transaction volumes nearing $200 billion.
The Financial Superintendency imposed a hefty fine of 500 million pesos ($133,000) against Bancolombia due to the disruption of its digital channels on June 3, 4, and 5, 2024. This incident severely affected Colombians, leaving them unable to access their accounts or conduct online transactions.
Bancolombia attributed this failure to “scheduled maintenance,” which took a problematic turn. However, the Financial Superintendency contended that this was not merely a maintenance issue but rather an emergency stemming from an “unexpected and irresistible crisis,” which the bank managed by following proper protocols and expert recommendations. Conversely, Bancolombia argued that the technological failure was entirely beyond their control and resulted from a third-party issue.
This marks the first time a Colombian bank has been penalized in this manner for such events.