Ukraine’s state owned Oschadbank is demanding the immediate return of large sums of cash and gold confiscated by Hungarian authorities near Budapest, rejecting claims from Hungarian officials that the funds may be linked to criminal activity or political financing.
Hungarian police seized approximately 40 million dollars, 35 million euros and nine kilograms of gold last week after intercepting a convoy of vehicles transporting the assets through Hungary. The operation triggered a diplomatic dispute between the two countries, with Hungary launching an investigation into suspected money laundering.
Lawyers representing Oschadbank in Hungary told Euronews that the funds were being transported legally as part of a routine transfer from Austria’s Raiffeisen Bank to the bank’s headquarters in Kyiv. The legal team said documentation clearly identifies the origin and intended purpose of the funds and that there is no evidence linking the money to criminal activity.
According to the lawyers, similar transfers have been carried out through Hungary since the start of Russia’s full scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. They said the operations have taken place with the knowledge and oversight of Hungarian authorities and described the seized shipment as a lawful transaction.
Hungarian officials have raised different concerns about the funds. Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó suggested the money could be connected to what he called a Ukrainian war mafia, while Construction and Transport Minister János Lázár speculated that the funds might be intended to support opposition political groups ahead of Hungary’s elections.
Oschadbank’s legal representatives strongly rejected those claims. They said the evidence available in the investigation does not support any connection to criminal groups or political financing within Hungary.
The case also led to the expulsion of seven Ukrainian nationals who were accompanying the shipment. Hungarian authorities have barred the individuals from entering the Schengen area and the broader European Union for three years, citing national security concerns.
Lawyers representing the individuals say the ban raises serious legal questions, including a lack of clear justification and limited transparency in the decision making process. They indicated the dispute could potentially be brought before the European Court of Human Rights if the situation is not resolved.
