Instagram Post Text
Attention! Translation was done using AI, mistakes are possible
In the first days of the war, I saw that many people started actively expressing their position — some tried to help, recommending charitable foundations for donations. Liya Akhedzhakova reportedly donated $10,000 — it wasn’t clear if it was real or fake, but it made a strong impression on me.
Out of indignation, I couldn’t stay on the sidelines either and decided to help somehow. I knew there were options for anonymous donations through cryptocurrency or other means, but I decided to go the official route: on the website of the National Bank of Ukraine, they’d posted details and an article about collecting funds for Ukraine’s support and recovery. I decided it would be good to do this publicly — there was nothing to be afraid of. I made a donation of 60,000 rubles through online banking, a standard SWIFT transfer to the posted details.
On February 27, I saw in the news that the Prosecutor General had issued guidance that financial support for Ukraine could be classified as state treason. All this time, the payment had been in “processing” status. I got worried and wanted to cancel the payment. I tried through the bank’s support service, but they said: “Nothing can be cancelled — it’s genuinely in processing. Try through your manager at the bank.” I have a personal manager at the bank, and the next day we submitted a request to cancel the payment. On March 1, the payment was cancelled and the money returned to my account. I calmed down somewhat.
But on March 3, everything started spinning. First, the information became known inside the bank. My direct supervisors said: “Alright, let’s sort this out.” They weren’t exactly sympathetic, but there was no criticism either.
They asked the bank’s security department to talk to me. After the conversation, they said: “We have no questions for you, but you’ll need to resign from the bank. That’s management’s decision. Once things settle down, you can go to another bank, you can come back in a year, but the decision has been made. So let’s do it by mutual agreement.” I said: “Damn. 11 years down the drain.” I thought I’d go to my boss later — things would settle in a week and I’d work something out.
That same evening, they asked me to come to the security department again. I thought maybe they’d appeal to bank management to reconsider the decision. I walk into the office, and there are officers from the local FSB directorate. Damn.
Every major bank has an assigned FSB officer who comes in whenever something falls under their jurisdiction. This isn’t related to the war — it’s always been that way. Our bank had its own assigned officer. All the security people and this FSB man were talking — you could tell it wasn’t their first meeting. I didn’t even know this happened.
We talked with him for a very long time, practically until nighttime. It was my first experience like this. They recorded everything in an interview report: “Where do you work? Who are your parents? Who are your brother and sister? What are your political views? How did the situation arise? Is there anyone in Ukraine? How do you feel about the DPR and LPR? Did you know a war has been going on for 8 years?” I say: “What war? I had no understanding that something had been going on there for 8 years.”
They also asked: “Why did you decide to help? What prompted it? Who advised you?” Of course I was scared. I told them everything as it was: nobody advised me, it wasn’t on anyone’s orders — just driven by strong emotions and sympathy for ordinary people. The FSB guy seemed to empathize. Until the end, I couldn’t tell: were they playing the role of nice, understanding people, or was it a trap?
The FSB officer said: “Despite the fact that the money was returned and no funds reached anyone, the very act of the transfer took place. Therefore, there is a criminal offense. This falls under the article on state treason — the sentence under this article is 12 to 20 years.” The only thing is, this article has a note stating that if the accused voluntarily and promptly helps prevent damage, punishment can be avoided. A case is opened regardless, but it’s immediately closed. This decision to close is made by the investigator who opens the case. That’s unlikely.
The officer who conducted the interview left, but passed me on to two other FSB employees. In their car, they drove me to my apartment, conducted a search — looked at laptops, phones, what equipment I had, what information was stored on the laptops. Earlier, at the bank, the first officer had confiscated my main mobile phone; at home, they confiscated my personal laptop.
They were trying to understand who had put me up to the transfer, or whether I was part of any groups or communities. Then, after the apartment, we drove to the FSB Directorate, where once again, on the record, they asked me to repeat everything the first officer had documented. Of course, I don’t know if I did the right thing — I told them everything as it was.
Late at night, I was released from the FSB Directorate.
They told me: “Alright, we’ll look into it now. An investigator may summon you for further testimony. Live your normal life.” It’s hard to live a normal life after that. I got home around midnight or 1 a.m. After talking with my brother, colleagues, and friends, I decided that same night to leave the country. I flew out on the nearest flight at 5 a.m.
When they explained which article I was being charged under and what the sentences were, I was extremely distressed, to put it mildly. Of course, the fear is enormous. My lawyer told me that while I’m abroad, it’s not in their interest to open a case and have it “hang” — they have their own statistics and reports. They made a note: as soon as I return, customs will be flagged that I’ve crossed the border, and they can immediately open a case.
In the worst-case scenario, it means 15 years of not returning to my homeland — the statute of limitations for this article. Of course, I wouldn’t want that. I very much want to go back. My lawyer said that in any case, this war needs to end first. We need to see how they handle similar cases, whether they’ll open proceedings. According to my lawyer, the FSB has now shifted its focus to a case against another person who provided financial support to Ukrainians.
