Shabunina has been accused of giving false evidence to the Temporary Investigation Commission regarding documents classified as ‘DSK’
Boiko wrote about this on Telegram.
According to Boiko, during a meeting of the parliamentary Temporary Investigative Commission, Shabunin allegedly stated that he did not have access to documents marked ‘For official use only’ and had not passed them on to anyone.
Boiko subsequently published screenshots of correspondence which, he claims, suggest otherwise. He claimed that Shabunin had forwarded to Oleksiy Shalayskyi – who was at the time editor-in-chief of the ‘Our Money’ project – a letter from the Defence Procurement Agency addressed to MP Viktoria Syumar, dated 16 June 2025.
According to Boiko, the document was marked ‘For official use only’ and contained information regarding the number of FPV drones that the Defence Procurement Agency was to procure for defence purposes. He also claims that the marking ‘copy No. 1’ makes it possible to identify the likely source of the information leak.
What Shabunin said at the Temporary Investigative Commission
Previously, media outlets analysing Shabunin’s testimony before the TSK reported that he denied the transfer of classified documents or state secrets to international partners.
In particular, UA.NEWS quoted his explanation that the CPC, as a civil society organisation, allegedly has no access to documents classified as ‘DSK’. The article quoted Shabunin as saying: “Neither I, nor Daria Kalenyuk, nor anyone else at the CPC, unfortunately, has access to DSK-classified documents.”
Why this could have consequences
Boiko stated that Shabunin had been warned of the consequences of giving false testimony before the Verkhovna Rada’s Temporary Investigative Commission.
At the same time, it is legally important to note that, at present, the matter concerns specifically Boyko’s statement and the screenshots he published, rather than an established fact of false testimony. It is for the competent authorities or the Temporary Investigation Commission itself to assess the authenticity of the correspondence, the status of the document, and the circumstances of its receipt and transmission.
What has not been officially confirmed
At the time of publication, there has been no official statement from the TSC, the Defence Procurement Agency, law enforcement agencies or the CPC itself confirming that Shabunin did in fact pass on a document classified as ‘DSK’.
Nor is there any official conclusion that Shabunin gave false testimony. Therefore, the correct phrasing for the news story is “Boiko accused”, “according to him”, “he published screenshots”, rather than “Shabunin lied” or “Shabunin leaked documents” as a proven fact.
The story has caused a stir because it concerns documents relating to defence procurement, specifically FPV drones for the Defence Forces. Even if a document does not contain state secrets, the classification ‘For official use only’ implies restricted access to the information.
A further conflict lies in the fact that Shabunin had publicly criticised defence procurement and the work of state bodies in this area, and now he himself has been accused of possibly leaking official documents.
Follow us on Telegram.
