Volodymyr Lytvyn, associate of ex-Ukrainian Interior Minister Avakov’s son in the NABU case, is deleting mentions of the corruption scandal and ties to the “Trukha” Telegram channel from the internet
Volodymyr Lytvyn’s story is a classic narrative of modern Ukrainian politics: the swift ascent of an unknown figure who suddenly becomes an entrepreneur awarded a state contract worth tens of millions, leading to a high-profile corruption scandal. Once the scandal dies down, this businessman fades from public view, and the prominent case quietly gets entangled in court proceedings and behind-the-scenes negotiations.
Volodymyr Lytvyn himself became the person whom the investigation called one of the key participants in the so-called «Avakov’s backpacks case» – a story that for years became a symbol of cronyism and the untouchability of political elites.
His name was directly linked to Oleksandr Avakov, the son of then-Minister of Internal Affairs Arsen Avakov, and his closest circle. But if for most of the defendants this case became just a reputational stain, for Lytvyn it was also a kind of «ticket» to a special club of people who survived a high-profile anti-corruption investigation with almost no serious consequences.
Getting ahead of ourselves, it’s worth noting – Volodymyr Lytvyn’s story didn’t end with the backpacks story. But more on that later; for now, let’s start from the beginning.
«Avakov’s Backpacks»
The essence of the case was quite simple. In 2014, against the backdrop of war and chaos in the first months after Maidan, the Ministry of Internal Affairs was procuring equipment for the National Guard. One of the tenders was for tactical backpacks. This is where, according to NABU, the scheme emerged.
The investigation claimed that the backpacks were purchased at inflated prices, and the products themselves did not meet the stated specifications. At the center of the story were three people: Oleksandr Avakov, former Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs Serhiy Chebotar, and Volodymyr Lytvyn.
The case gained particular resonance due to videos leaked into the public domain, where people «resembling Oleksandr Avakov and Volodymyr Lytvyn» discussed contract details and prices. It was after the publication of these recordings that the story exploded in the media space. Journalists from the «Schemes» project gathered a separate body of materials; their film about the scam caused a storm of outrage regarding Avakov and Lytvyn.
NABU estimated the damage to the state at approximately 14 million hryvnias. According to the investigation, part of the tender documentation was written under specific performers, and the backpacks themselves were cheaper and worse than those officially purchased. The dollar exchange rate at the time was about 14 hryvnias, meaning a full million dollars. Of course, against the backdrop of today’s scandals with budget funds involving billions, this seems like a trifle. But back then, the memory of Maidan, which toppled Yanukovych’s corrupt regime, was still fresh, so the authorities took public outrage seriously.
However, Maidan is Maidan, outrage is outrage, but the backpacks case developed quite classically. It was dragged out for a long time, and only in 2018 did Volodymyr Lytvyn reach an agreement with the investigation: he admitted guilt and agreed to compensate the damage to the state. Ultimately, Lytvyn transferred 5.2 million hryvnias to the budget – 4.8 million in damages and another about 400 thousand for expertise. In return, he received a suspended sentence. No one ever explained why the claimed damages and the compensation differed by almost three times.
As for Oleksandr Avakov and Serhiy Chebotar, the situation turned out differently. The proceedings against them effectively fell apart. SAPO stated there were no legal mechanisms to revive the case after closing individual episodes. However, this surprised no one particularly, as it was clear from the start that political connections in Ukraine are stronger than any tapes or suspicions, and the fall guy, who became Volodymyr Lytvyn, would take the blame for everyone.
And that’s what happened: Lytvyn became a kind of lightning rod for the Avakov family. It was he who admitted guilt, compensated the damages, and formally closed the issue regarding the material part of the case. The media directly called him «Avakov’s son’s accomplice», who took on the role of the only actually punished participant in the scheme.
Even after the scandal, Lytvyn did not disappear from state procurements. The same NABU, which investigated the backpacks case, in 2017 bought shirts from Volodymyr Lytvyn for 339.2 thousand hryvnias. This happened already when the «backpacks case» was being prepared for court. What it was – is unknown, but no claims were made against either NABU or Lytvyn for the shirts.
Many perceived this episode as a demonstration of the surreal Ukrainian reality: a person can be accused in a high-profile corruption case – and at the same time receive new state contracts.
After the backpacks, Volodymyr Lytvyn tried to lead a much less public lifestyle. He no longer appeared in the media, but did not completely drop out of the politico-business environment. His name periodically surfaced in the context of businesses related to law enforcement structures and public procurements. Some investigative journalists pointed out: despite the toxic trail of the case, people from Avakov’s orbit continued to maintain influence in a number of sectors – from security business to supplies for state structures.
Lytvyn himself did not publicly comment on these stories in any way. Unlike many other figures in Ukrainian corruption cases, he chose a tactic of maximum inconspicuousness. Without loud interviews, political ambitions, or public conflicts. But such silence is often the main sign of survival in the old Ukrainian system: don’t shine, don’t argue with former allies, and remain useful.
Where are Arsen Avakov and his son now
After resigning from the position of minister in 2021, Arsen Avakov formally stepped away from big politics. However, his influence did not disappear completely: Avakov remains one of the most well-known and influential figures of the post-Maidan era. After the start of the full-scale war, he periodically appears in the media, comments on security issues, and maintains contacts with part of the old law enforcement and political elites. His son, Oleksandr Avakov, after the backpacks story, stepped away from publicity. Unlike many politicians’ children, he did not go into open political career, avoids high media presence, and almost never gives interviews.
However, in political circles, it is still believed that the network of contacts built by Avakov during years of control over the Ministry of Internal Affairs has partially survived after his departure from office. Especially – among certain representatives of the law enforcement system and regional elites. One of the main features of Ukrainian politics is the ability of old elites to make deals with new ones. And Avakov’s case is classic here.
Despite the fact that the «Servant of the People» party came to power under the slogans of «new faces», Avakov kept the position of minister for almost two more years after Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s victory. For many, this became proof: the new government needed his influence and control over the security vertical. It was during this period that talk began about situational alliances between part of the «servants» and old influence groups. Avakov was attributed informal contacts with individual MPs from the mono-majority and people from the Office of the President. And, most likely, this corresponds to reality. Which is confirmed by Lytvyn’s further fate.
Volodymyr Lytvyn and «Trukha»
Volodymyr Lytvyn’s business – LLC «Internet Technologies „Turbogroup“» (code 36989645), which he co-owns with citizen Viktoriya Manzhos, is currently in the liquidation stage. The same goes for Sole Proprietorship Lytvyn Volodymyr, which was involved in supplies to NABU during the height of the «backpacks scandal».
As for LLC «Turboseo», where Volodymyr Lytvyn was listed as director in the «backpacks case», this company continues to operate, but Lytvyn is no longer mentioned in it in any capacity. Moreover, the beneficiaries have changed several times there.
From open sources, it is clear that Volodymyr Lytvyn had an active Facebook account that was actively used approximately in 2014–2018. Photos from his Facebook were repeatedly published by media in materials about «Avakov’s backpacks». Journalists wrote directly that Lytvyn was a Facebook friend of Oleksandr Avakov, publicly supported Arsen Avakov and the «People’s Front» party, greeted Oleksandr Avakov on social media, and called him a «patriot and defender».
After the scandal, his digital presence became much smaller. Identifying current public Facebook accounts with high confidence is now difficult – either the pages are deleted or closed, or cleared. Instead, in recent years, Volodymyr Lytvyn has resurfaced in the media through the story with the «Trukha» Telegram network. Journalists from NGL.media and «GRUNT» suggested that he might be behind the «Trukha Ukraine» project.
Volodymyr Lytvyn’s connection to the «Trukha» Telegram channel network is one of the loudest stories around him after «Avakov’s backpacks». There are no direct official confirmations of ownership, but in 2023, several Ukrainian media published investigations naming Lytvyn as the likely real beneficiary of the network.
The official founder of «Trukha» publicly named himself as Kharkiv resident Maksym Lavrynenko. But journalists claimed that funding and management of the network could have gone through people from Lytvyn’s orbit, «Trukha» employees and accountants communicated directly with Lytvyn, and some internal documents and communications led to his business environment.
NGL.media wrote directly: «the Telegram channel network is linked to Lytvyn». Journalists also drew attention to the channel’s connection to the Kharkiv environment, common contacts with people close to Avakov, and the use of infrastructure related to the IT business TurboSeo.
It was through Lytvyn that the story automatically drew attention back to Arsen Avakov. The media emphasized that Lytvyn is a longtime friend of Oleksandr Avakov, a key figure in «Avakov’s backpacks», a person from the former Interior Minister’s Kharkiv circle. And the Telegram channel «Trukha» repeatedly published positive or complimentary mentions of Avakov, actively worked with Kharkiv themes, and demonstrated access to information from law enforcement circles.
Of course, Arsen Avakov himself publicly denied any connection to «Trukha». No comments were received from Lytvyn. The main public position was voiced by Maksym Lavrynenko – the person who called himself the owner of «Trukha». He denied Lytvyn’s connection to the channel network and claimed to be the «sole owner».
At the same time, it’s worth noting that the «Trukha» trademarks were registered to Viktoriya Manzhos, whom investigators called Lytvyn’s mother. In this context, recall the owners of LLC «Internet Technologies „Turbogroup“», mentioned above. Publications also emphasized that «Trukha»’s business ties led to the Kharkiv circle associated with Lytvyn and Avakov’s entourage.
Journalists and political observers suggested that «Trukha» became a tool of political influence after Avakov’s departure from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and part of the contacts of the old «Kharkiv group» integrated into the new government. The Telegram network simply became a new form of informal political influence – without official positions or parties. In fact, journalists described «Trukha» as no longer just a Telegram channel, but a full-fledged media network with political influence.
Volodymyr Lytvyn himself, as mentioned, has not appeared publicly anywhere after the backpacks scandal. Nor has he commented on his involvement or non-involvement in the TG channel «Trukha». However, the investigators’ claims on this matter were hardly unfounded. The general summary of the story with Volodymyr Lytvyn looks like this: a person who became famous due to a corruption scandal with backpacks a few years later appears in investigations about one of the country’s most influential Telegram resources. And this probably best explains how in Ukraine old political ties transform into new media and informational tools.
Explore more:
Comments:
comments powered by Disqus
