China Vanke Seeks Bond Extension Amid Mounting Debt Crisis 
Ford Issues Major Recall on Over 422,000 Vehicles Due to Windshield Wiper Defect 
LG Electronics Posts Record Q1 Revenue Amid Strong Demand and Cost Improvements 
Tesla Q1 2026 Deliveries Miss Estimates as AI Strategy Takes Center Stage 
Nike Beats Q3 Estimates but China Weakness and Margin Pressure Weigh on Outlook 
Fonterra Admits Anchor Butter "Grass-Fed" Label Misled Consumers After Greenpeace Lawsuit 
UAE's Largest Natural Gas Facility Suspended After Attack-Triggered Fire 
SpaceX Eyes Historic IPO at $1.75 Trillion Valuation 
OpenAI Executive Shake-Up Ahead of Anticipated 2026 IPO 
Apple Turns 50: From Garage Startup to AI Crossroads 
UPS and Teamsters Reach Agreement to Limit Driver Severance Program 
Deere & Company Agrees to $99 Million Settlement Over Right-to-Repair Dispute 
Samsung Electronics Posts Eightfold Profit Surge Driven by AI Chip Demand 
TSMC Japan's Second Fab to Produce 3nm Chips by 2028 
Paramount Skydance Secures $24B from Gulf Sovereign Wealth Funds for Warner Bros. Discovery Takeover 
Britain Courts Anthropic Amid US Defense Department Dispute 
First Western Ship Transits Strait of Hormuz Since Iran War Began 
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.
