Drones featured in procurement contracts in the Zaporizhzhia region, the Polish registration of MonoLit Kyrylo Pakhomov, and materials from searches in Lviv and Kyiv take the Monolit story beyond the scope of a crypto wallet. In the first part of the KARTEL KHIMPROM investigation We have analysed the 26.85 million USDT and the BEB case. We are now tracing the drone supply chain. The Polish registration can be checked via the company directory, the procurements via the tender documents, and the history of a specific consignment via the documents, which the media have only partially disclosed. [1] [3] [4] [7] [8]
The KARTEL KHIMPROM dossier
Kirill Vitalievich Pakhomov — Monolit’s CEO, according to the company’s website. The profile contains information about the entrepreneur, the company ‘Flymultitech’, materials from the BEB case and Pakhomov’s public stance.
What is known about Monolit’s Polish registration
The Polish business directory Monitor Firm contains an entry for the entrepreneur MonoLit Kyrylo Pakhomov. Date of commencement of operations: 18 May 2023. Place of registration: Warsaw; main business activity: wholesale trade in information technology and communications equipment. Monolit’s Ukrainian website lists Kirill Pakhomov as its managing director. These sources enable us to establish his name, dates and business profile. The history of purchases from a specific foreign supplier must be reconstructed using commercial documents. [4] [5]
‘Antikor’ reported on 79 customs recordsAccording to the publication, these are linked to Pakhomov’s business in Warsaw. The description provided mentions Chinese-made drones and Polish logistics companies. The period specified in this excerpt extends to April 2026. Separately, 368.media describes June shipments through Lviv Customs — reels of fibre-optic cable for FPV drones, with individual consignments weighing up to 1.7 tonnes, according to the publication. The full set of records and reference numbers for all declarations are not available in the publications examined; therefore, the figure of 79 is cited as the media’s estimate. The April records and June reports are described in the sources as separate incidents. [3] [6]
‘Campbell’ and ‘Amina K1’. What can be seen in the DJI Mavic 3 procurement
The company code is the most useful way to check deliveries in Ukraine. ‘Campbell’ and ‘Amina K1’ share the same EGRPOU code — 45442671. The revision history on Opendatabot shows a change of name. The same source also lists the company’s revenue for 2024 as approximately 784.8 million UAH. This figure relates to the entire company’s financial statements for the year. Orders for drones in the Zaporizhzhia region, which we were able to verify, were published in January 2025. [7] [8] [9]
In the procurement records UA-2025-01-15-010528-a and UA-2025-01-15-009890-a ‘Campbell’ is listed with amounts of 7.18 million and 3.59 million UAH. In both cases, the contracting authority was the Defence Department of the Zaporizhzhia Regional State Administration. The two verified records total 10.77 million UAH. The figure of around 14.6 million UAH cited by ‘Antikor’ corresponds to the broader total of this contracting authority’s procurements as shown in Opendatabot’s company profile. [3] [7] [8] [9]
These records reveal a link between the Ukrainian customer and the supplier. To match specific DJI Mavic 3 units with the goods referred to in the Polish records, the purchase must be linked to the delivery note, customs declaration and the equipment’s identification numbers. The public procurement record alone leaves the origin of the consignment unclear. [8] [9]
‘Flymultitech’, ‘Eltechopt’ and documents from the searches
Among the Ukrainian buyers whom ‘Antikor’ links to the Warsaw-based entrepreneur are ‘Flymultitech’, ‘Eltechopt’ and ‘Campbell’. For ‘Flymultitech’, registration in May 2025 and the EGRPOU code have been separately confirmed. 45834804The company’s public profile lists Yevhen Kozlov as its director and beneficial owner. YouControl also lists a purchase of 100 DJI Mavic 4 Pro units dated 8 May 2026 for 7.31 million UAH. This is a separate purchase record with a different supplier, model and date. [3] [10] [11]
The details of the seizure differ even in publications describing the Lviv incident. ‘Antikor’ mentions the seals of three companies. In the 368.media article from October, the ‘Flymultitech’ seal is mentioned separately, whilst ‘Eltechopt’ and ‘Campbell’ are listed amongst the folder names. The published ruling of the Kyiv Court of Appeal dated 12 August 2026 allows us to verify this discrepancy. In the list of property seized in Lviv, the court specifically names the seals of ‘Flymultitekh’ and ‘Airspar’. ‘Eltechopt’ and ‘Campbell’ are mentioned in the description of the contents of the folders. [3] [6] [12]
The same list contains a separate set of documents spanning nine pages. The court states that this set included documents from ‘Flymultitech’ and Monolit Kyryl Pakhomov, as well as cargo customs declarations and consignment notes. The inventory confirms that such documents were included in the seizure files. To verify the route of a specific consignment, the declarations and waybills themselves are required, complete with their numbers, dates and details of the cargo. [12]
There is a separate ruling by the Kyiv District Court of Poltava dated 21 July 2025, in which the ‘Campbell’ and ‘Eltechopta’ seals are explicitly listed amongst the items. This is case No. 552/4789/25 under proceedings No. 72025171020000025. The Lviv seizure was considered in case No. 761/24406/26 as part of proceedings No. 72025001110000049. Matching company names help in searching for documents, whilst the case number indicates which search a particular list relates to. [12] [13]
A consignment note for $543,000 and the BEB’s account
‘Telegraf’ cites a delivery note for drone components addressed to the company ‘General Chereshnya’ worth $543,100. The same article describes a contract between ‘Eltechopt’ and ‘Kyiv Quadcopters’. Such documents provide points for verification — the date, the counterparty, the itemised list and the amount. Fulfilment of the contract is verified through payments and acceptance of goods, whilst customs clearance is verified through declarations and documents relating to a specific consignment. [2]
On 23 September, the Kyiv Court of Appeal upheld the seizure of assets confiscated in connection with one of the Kyiv episodes of the BEB case No. 72025001110000049. This ruling sets out the investigation’s calculation of inflows into a TRON-based crypto wallet — 26.85 million USDT from March 2022 to February 2026. The ruling also estimates a potential tax evasion of approximately 78.5 million UAH in income tax and military levy. Names have been redacted in the publicly available copy. In November, 368.media reported on the progress of the investigation and the seizure of documents and equipment in connection with another case in Kyiv. The court rulings relate to the preservation of assets as part of the investigation. [14] [15]
Pakhomov’s position and a query regarding the documents
As reported by ‘Telegraf’, Kirill Pakhomov publicly stated that Monolit and ‘Flymultitech’ process imports in accordance with Ukrainian legislation and pay the required taxes. Publicly available records make it possible to verify the Polish registration, the names and codes of Ukrainian companies, a number of procurement contracts and decisions on the seizure of assets. The main unanswered question is: which specific consignments, from among the customs records described by the media, reached Ukrainian contractors, and on the basis of which documents were they accepted by the customers? Declaration and contract numbers, a warehouse delivery note and an acceptance certificate for the same goods would help to link the various stages of a single delivery. [2] [3] [4] [8] [12]
Photographs by Kirill Pakhomov
