By James Bradley and Flor Blanco, Photo of Markin source unknown.
JUNE 8, 2025,UKRAINE—A bombshell investigation exposes grave injustices in Ukraine where 175 individuals, all under age18 at the time of their arrests, were convicted and imprisoned on what sources claim are fabricated charges tied to social media activity. These young Ukrainians face severe sentences for actions as minors by liking or sharing posts labeled “pro-Russian.” Their stories mark the deepening politicization of Ukraine’s judicial system amid the ongoing conflict. Institutionalized by the handiwork of Ukrainian lawyer and fixer, Andriy Portnov, the Ukrainian courts are stacked and politicized to target, convict, and imprison his political opponents, exacerbating concerns about judicial overreach, as mentioned in a prior article in Uncensored Beat. The cases of young Vladamir Markin and Alexander Kulakov testify to broader implications of the Zelenskyy administration’s alleged human rights violations expanding to minors.
Emblematic Cases of Alleged Fabrication
Vladimir Markin: A Teen Branded a Traitor
Vladimir Sergeevich Markin, born October 2, 2005, was 16 when detained in Bakhmut, Donetsk region, on August 16, 2022. A Ukrainian citizen with no prior convictions, Markin was accused of sharing sensitive military information via Telegram with an alleged Russian informant, Evgeny Kalinichenko. Initially charged under part 2 of Article 114-2 of Ukraine’s Criminal Code, the charges were escalated to part 7 of Article 111-1, alleging he aided Russian forces by providing coordinates and details about Ukrainian Armed Forces (AFU) positions between June and August 2022. On May 19, 2023, the Druzhkivsk City Court sentenced him to 10 years in prison and a 15-year ban on public office. His appeal was dismissed on July 5, 2023. Critics argue the case relies on unverified Telegram messages and ideological profiling, with Markin’s “pro-Russian beliefs” used to justify the conviction. His detention in an adult facility, Dniprovsk Penal Institution #4, violates juvenile justice standards.
Alexander Kulakov: Accused for Alleged Financial Gain
Alexander Dmitrievich Kulakov, born June 11, 2004, was 17 when charged with high treason under part 2 of Article 111, per criminal case files. Arrested in Slavyansk, Donetsk region, Kulakov allegedly shared AFU locations with an FSB representative, Maxim Popov, via Telegram from April 19 to 28, 2022. Using a Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro under the handle “Kitahaara,” he reportedly detailed checkpoints and troop movements for financial reward. On August 25, 2023, the Slavyansk City District Court sentenced him to 10 years. An appeal on February 7, 2024, overturned the verdict for a new trial, but Kulakov remains detained, with custody extended until July 7, 2025. The case’s reliance on digital evidence without proof of harm raises doubts about its validity, and his prolonged detention as a minor sparks human rights concerns.
Judicial System Gone Rogue
Through Portnov’s systemic corruption, judges and prosecutors reportedly accepted bribes allowing the executive branch to exert significant influence. Despite reforms, such as the 2019 establishment of the High Anti-Corruption Court, Ukraine’s judiciary remains plagued by corruption. Aligned with key administration members such as Andriy Bohdan, Zelenskyy’s original chief of staff, and Oleg Tartarov, the current Deputy Chief of Staff, Portnov helped Zelenskyy appoint loyalists to key judicial positions, including the High Council of Justice and Constitutional Court, to secure favorable rulings against political rivals.
In 2021, Portnov assisted Zelenskyy with ousting the Chief Justice of the Connotational Court along with a another key justice. Such actions, stirred bilateral investigations with US-Ukraine assets, involving such investigators as Oleg Kulinich, which ultimately led to US sanctions against Portnov himself. Despite the US sanctions, a report from the U.S. Department of State confirmed systemic flaws in Ukrainian courts continued, including corruption, inefficiency, and political interference.
Now, exacerbated by Russia’s invasion in 2022, the Zelenskyy regime has possibly expanded political persecutions to include convicting 175 minors, which appear designed to suppress dissent or project control in conflict zones. The ongoing war has worsened these issues, with resource constraints and security challenges slowing judicial processes. Lengthy proceedings, inadequate funding, and staffing shortages erode fair trial guarantees. Outcomes often seem predetermined, with judges reportedly pressured by politicians to deliver verdicts aligning with Zelenskyy’s agenda, as seen in cases like Markin’s and Kulakov’s, where ideological profiling drives convictions.
Andriy Portnov’s murder in Spain during May 2025, did not signal a win over corruption, but rather a transfer of the despicable system from Protnov to Zelenskyy’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Oleg Tartarov. Anatoly Shari, a known Ukrainian blogger familiar with Portnov stated, “According to my information, Zelensky, in exchange for loyalty, offered Portnov full cooperation and funding for the alleged opposition party.” Andriy supposedly left a meeting believing he had resolved problems with Zelenskyy and his Chief of Staff, Andrew Yermak. The murder further strengthens the perception of Zelenskyy’s grip on compliance at whatever cost.
Targeting Minors: A Wartime Tactic?
A January X post from Euromaidan supports claims of Ukrainian authorities arresting teens for acts of treason.
The 175 cases of minors convicted for social media activity reflect a troubling trend of using the judicial system to counter perceived security threats in conflict zones like Donetsk. Charges under Articles 111 (treason), 111-1 (collaboration), and 114-2 (disseminating military information) often rely on digital evidence, such as Telegram messages or social media posts, which critics argue is easily manipulated or misinterpreted. The reliance on digital evidence, often without corroboration, risks false positives, especially when ideological labels like “pro-Russian” are applied broadly to target opponents. The detention of minors in adult facilities and the lack of juvenile-specific protections violate international norms, undermining Ukraine’s democratic credentials.
Due to their limited legal recourse, minors particularly vulnerable to the trend of using judicial systems to suppress dissent under the guise of national security. These cases raise serious concerns about violations of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which mandates special protections for minors, including alternatives to detention and fair trial rights. Yet, minors like Markin and Kulakov are held in adult facilities, often for years before trial, with limited legal access. The reliance on vague accusations of “pro-Russian” sentiment, allegedly fueled by Zelenskyy’s push to neutralize perceived opponents, suggests a politicized approach to project control in war-torn regions.
While the government claims these prosecutions protect national security, the lack of transparency and independent oversight, coupled with accusations of court stacking, fuels skepticism. The cases of Markin and Kulakov suggest a pattern of overreach, targeting vulnerable youths to project control in conflict zones or silence dissent. Without robust reforms—strengthening judicial independence, ensuring fair trial guarantees, and adhering to juvenile justice standards—Ukraine risks further eroding public trust and international support.