Samsung Workers Approve Wage Deal, Avoiding Major Strike and Boosting Chip Supply Confidence 
HP Q2 2026 Earnings Beat Expectations Despite Memory Chip Pressure 
Snowflake Stock Soars 30% After Q1 Earnings Beat and Major AWS AI Partnership 
Dell Raises 2027 Revenue Forecast as AI Server Demand Drives Record Quarterly Results 
Autodesk Beats Q1 Estimates, Acquires MaintainX for $3.6 Billion 
MongoDB Q1 FY2027 Earnings Beat Expectations, Raises Full-Year Outlook 
Marvell Stock Rises After Record Q1 FY2027 Earnings Fueled by AI Demand 
European EV Sales Surge in April 2026 as Tesla and Chinese Automakers Gain Ground 
Meta Subscription Push Could Add Billions in Recurring Revenue, Says Rosenblatt 
Costco Q3 Fiscal 2026 Earnings Beat Expectations as Sales and E-Commerce Surge 
Australia Sues 3M for Over A$2 Billion Over PFAS Firefighting Foam Contamination 
SpaceX IPO Could Become Largest in History with $1.8 Trillion Valuation Target 
CTOC Goes Live on Bitget Wallet Trading, Expanding Global Access to AI-Powered Healthcare Data Ecosystem 
Kentucky School District Secures $27 Million in Social Media Addiction Lawsuit Settlements 
Universal Music Group Rejects Pershing Square Takeover Proposal 
Samsung Union Dispute Escalates Over Semiconductor Bonus Vote 
JPMorgan Sees Biotech Sector at Turning Point, Upgrades Top Pharma Stocks 
On 12 March, the Bureau of Economic Security (abbreviated - BES) announced that it was requesting a special investigation into the case of the owner of IBOX Bank. On 13 March, Judge Volodymyr Marmash will consider this motion in the Lychakivskyi District Court of Lviv, kp.ua reports.
The defence believes that the BES detectives and Judge Marmash violate Ukrainian law.
The BES detectives are seeking to reopen the case against the owner of IBOX BANK, even though on 5 December 2024, the Supreme Court settled the issue once and for all in the criminal case against her and cancelled the illegal decisions made by the detective of the BES Territorial Office in the Lviv Region, thereby confirming the illegality of the prosecution’s actions in the said proceedings.
The defence of the accused believes that the BES detectives and Judge Marmash, by accepting such a motion for consideration, grossly violate Ukrainian law. After all, the deadline for pretrial investigation in the criminal proceedings against the owner of IBOX BANK has been exceeded by 3 months, which is unacceptable in cases of this category.
Thus, the defence emphasises that the BES’s attempts to reopen the case against the Bank’s management are accompanied by numerous violations of the criminal procedure. 'The prosecution is pursuing its selfish interests, which are not related to a legitimate investigation aimed at identifying the real criminals,' the defence comments.
Earlier, it was reported that it was the Lychakivskyi District Court that considers many cases initiated by the BES and the State Bureau of Investigation (abbreviated – SBI). It was suspected that such cases may be ordered, and their consideration may be managed in a ‘manual mode’ in order to blackmail the accused. It is noted that if such offences are found by the investigator and judge, the penalty may be up to 10 years in prison. If future investigations reveal signs of corruption offences in the actions of these individuals, the penalty may be significantly increased with the mandatory confiscation of property acquired due to such ‘legal’ activities.
As a reminder, it is the Lychakivskyi District Court of Lviv that has been considering the criminal case against the traitor Viktor Medvedchuk for more than two years. And the Presiding Judge of this Court, Mr Hryhorii Zhovnir, ensured that the case was heard in camera, thus listening to Medvedchuk's lawyers.
This article does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editors or management of EconoTimes.
