The court in Kyiv found the claims of the NACP against Ukraine’s ambassador to Israel, Yevhen Korniychuk, to be unfounded

The appellate court upheld a key decision

The Sixth Appellate Administrative Court of Kyiv found the main claims of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention against the declaration of Ukraine’s ambassador to Israel, Yevhen Korniychuk, to be unfounded. The dispute concerns the full audit of the diplomat’s declaration for 2021. This was reported by the Ukrainian publication “Lіvyi Bereh” on March 8, 2026.

The ruling was made on May 6, 2026. The appellate court upheld the main part of the decision of the Kyiv District Administrative Court from December 17, 2025, which had previously fully satisfied Korniychuk’s claim against the NACP.

For the Israeli audience, this story is important not only as a Ukrainian legal dispute. Yevhen Korniychuk holds the position of Ukraine’s ambassador to Israel, meaning any public accusations or their refutation around his name directly reflect on the diplomatic context between Kyiv and Jerusalem.

What exactly was disputed

The dispute concerned the NACP’s report following the full audit of Korniychuk’s declaration for 2021. The agency questioned certain information related to cash assets, property value, and a watch collection.

The NACP placed particular emphasis on the origin of cash funds. However, according to the court’s position, this money was declared back in 2020 and was received long before Korniychuk’s appointment to a government position.

The court reviewed the audit materials for 2020 and 2021 and essentially confirmed: following the full audit of the 2020 declaration, no signs of violations related to false declarations, illegal enrichment, or unjustified assets were found.

In other words, the same circumstances that previously did not raise confirmed claims were later assessed differently by the NACP in the 2021 audit. This became one of the key elements of the court dispute.

Court: it was about inaccuracies, not an attempt to hide property

The court’s ruling stated that the NACP’s conclusions about false declarations were unfounded. The court concluded that Korniychuk’s actions might have only contained inaccuracies, which do not indicate an intention to hide information.

This is a fundamental point. In declaration cases, the difference between a technical inaccuracy and deliberate concealment of property is significant. The former may result from formal or methodological discrepancies. The latter already forms a completely different level of legal and reputational risks.

In this case, the court found no grounds to speak of illegal enrichment, unjustified assets, or false data in the sense that the NACP tried to prove.

For the diplomatic service, this is especially sensitive. An ambassador works not only with documents but also with the trust of the host country, political circles, businesses, community organizations, and the media. Therefore, the court’s decision in Korniychuk’s case is significant for the Ukrainian-Israeli information field.

NANews — Israel News | Nikk.Agency follows such stories in this context: when internal Ukrainian legal decisions can affect the perception of Ukraine in Israel, the operation of diplomatic channels, and trust in Kyiv’s official representatives.

Land plot and the “unknown” mark

Separately, the court considered the issue of a land plot that Korniychuk inherited. The ambassador indicated the value as “unknown” because the property had not been appraised.

The court agreed with this approach. According to the logic of the decision, if the value of the property was not known to the declarant, the law does not require it to be artificially indicated or calculated independently without an appraisal.

This is an important detail because in declaration disputes, formal fields sometimes become grounds for broad accusations. But in this episode, the court effectively separated a real violation from a situation where the declarant acted within the framework of a legally provided option for filling out.

Why the court criticized the NACP’s methodology

Another significant block of the case concerned the NACP’s approach to calculating Korniychuk’s income over a long period — from 1998 until his appointment.

The court found the agency’s methodology erroneous because such an audit did not take into account inflationary processes. This, according to the court’s position, led to a distortion of economic indicators.

For the average reader, this can be explained simply: money earned decades ago cannot be assessed as if the economic reality remained unchanged all these years. If the auditing body does not account for inflation and changes in the value of money over time, the calculation may present a distorted picture.

Watch collection: the court did not support the agency’s claims

The court also confirmed the legitimacy of canceling the NACP’s conclusions regarding the information about the watch collection.

The case materials noted that the watches were purchased before the start of public service. At the same time, the NACP, according to the court, unjustifiably questioned their existence.

This episode became part of a broader judicial logic: claims to the declaration should be based not on assumptions but on provable circumstances. If the property was acquired before the appointment and there are no confirmed signs of illegal asset origin, the mere fact of ownership cannot automatically become a violation.

What the decision means for Ukraine’s ambassador to Israel

The appellate court’s ruling came into legal force on the date of adoption — May 6, 2026. However, it can be appealed within thirty days from the date of the full court decision by filing a cassation appeal to the Supreme Court.

This means that legally the story may still continue if the NACP decides to proceed further. However, at the moment, the appellate court confirmed: the main claims against Yevhen Korniychuk’s declaration were found to be unfounded.

For Ukraine, this decision is important in terms of legal certainty. For Israel, it is important in terms of diplomatic stability. When public accusations arise around the ambassador of an allied country, their judicial assessment becomes part of a broader context of relations between states.

In this case, the court effectively separated the audited declaration issues from political noise. It indicated that no false information, signs of illegal enrichment, or signs of unjustified assets were established.

Context for Ukrainian-Israeli relations

Korniychuk remains one of the prominent figures of Ukrainian diplomacy in Israel, especially against the backdrop of Russia’s war against Ukraine, aid issues, the grain scandal, humanitarian agenda, and ongoing dialogue with Israeli society.

Therefore, the court’s decision in Kyiv has not only administrative significance. It affects the reputational background around the Ukrainian diplomatic mission in Israel.

Formally, it was about the 2021 declaration. But in essence, the court considered a broader question: how justified were the NACP’s conclusions and whether the identified discrepancies could be considered a sign of deliberate data concealment. The appellate court’s answer was in favor of the diplomat.