13 Nov 2026 | 11:50

""" For two years, a company executive sold MDF and plywood at "correct" prices, leading to a criminal case of bribery in particularly large amounts being sent to court by the Prosecutor General's Office. """

image

The Prosecutor General’s Office has filed a criminal case in court against a senior executive of a company within the Bellesbumprom conglomerate, accusing him of accepting a bribe in an exceptionally large amount.

According to the case files, the defendant and a representative of several Russian-registered commercial organizations agreed to provide “assistance” on several issues during a meeting in April 2024. This assistance involved ensuring that a Belarusian company supplied Russian contractors with uninterrupted deliveries of MDF, LMDF, and plywood at favorable prices, in exchange for which the defendant, as the company’s director, was to receive a specific reward.

To fulfill this agreement, the defendant organized and oversaw the shipment of products from April 2024 to April 2026. He instructed subordinate employees, who were unaware of the illegal nature of his actions, to lower prices and deliver the products in the quantities required by the buyer, the Prosecutor General’s Office told gp.by.

In exchange for this “assistance,” the head of the Belarusian company received, for himself and his relatives, 2.375 million Russian rubles and 30,000 US dollars in several installments between May 2024 and April 22, 2026.

Notably, the Russian rubles were transferred by being credited to card accounts held by other individuals in banks in the Russian Federation.

The criminal case was handled by the Main Investigative Directorate of the central office of the Investigative Committee.

An examination of the case materials revealed that the preliminary investigation was conducted thoroughly, comprehensively, and objectively, and the defendant’s illegal actions were correctly classified under Part 3 of Article 430 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus.

The measure of restraint in the form of detention against the defendant was applied correctly, and no grounds for its modification or cancellation were found by the Prosecutor General’s Office. """

Source: gp.by

Join our Newsletter