The situation surrounding the criminal prosecution of Sergej Engelmann, editor-in-chief of World of Martial Arts Magazine and a German journalist, continues to escalate. In May of this year, the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany officially submitted a note of protest to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine. The basis for this diplomatic action was a series of procedural violations committed during the investigation and trial in Engelmann’s case, particularly those involving Ruslan Voitov, a prosecutor with the Odessa Regional Prosecutor’s Office.
This article presents a systematic overview of the key facts that led to the diplomatic response and examines the situation in the context of international law, highlighting the potential legal consequences for those responsible for violating the rights of a German citizen on Ukrainian territory.
Brief Background: The Case of Sergej Engelmann
On October 14, 2024, our editor-in-chief, German citizen Sergej Engelmann, was detained by Ukrainian border guards while traveling from Ukraine to join his family in Cologne.
In 2021, Sergej Engelmann, together with scientist Oleg Maltsev, founded a research institute in Ukraine dedicated to the study of human behavior in extreme situations. Despite the military conflict, he made a deliberate decision to remain in the country, continuing both his scientific and editorial work. He was deeply convinced of Ukraine’s scientific potential and sincerely committed to the unique history and people of the country.
When scientist Oleg Maltsev was arrested on trumped-up charges in September 2024, Sergej witnessed the unfolding events firsthand and provided support to Maltsev’s family and friends following the arrest. He also did everything in his power to ensure that the international community became aware of the blatant fabrication of criminal charges against the scientist in Ukraine.
As a result, our editor was arrested just four days after the publication of his investigative article, titled Who Ordered the Smear Campaign Against Oleg Maltsev?, in which he critically examined the circumstances of the criminal prosecution of the Ukrainian scholar.
Since his arrest, Engelmann’s fundamental rights as a foreign citizen have been systematically violated. All procedural documents were issued exclusively in Ukrainian, and it was only after numerous complaints that the defense succeeded in obtaining a German translation of the indictment—nearly five months after his detention. By that time, Sergej had already spent over 140 days in custody. Additionally, an independent linguistic analysis commissioned by the defense confirmed that the translated documents did not correspond to the Ukrainian originals and could not be considered authentic.
The most egregious aspect of the case remains that the indictment fails to specify a single unlawful act allegedly committed by Engelmann on Ukrainian territory. It also names no victims of any such supposed offenses. Furthermore, the defense submitted official documentation to the court confirming that, during the period when the alleged “crime” took place (from April 20 to May 5, 2022), Sergej was outside Ukraine—in Germany and Croatia. According to data provided by the State Border Service of Ukraine, he left the country on February 20, 2022, and did not return until May 14, 2022—making it physically impossible for him to have committed the acts of which he is accused.
Nevertheless, despite his documented alibi and the numerous procedural violations committed by the prosecution, Sergej Engelmann remains in custody. Attorney Alexandr Babikov notes the extremely harsh conditions of his detention—both in terms of sanitation and hygiene, as well as the psychological toll—particularly given the severely limited access to external communication.
Is an International Scandal to Be Expected?
At the initiative of attorney Alexandr Babikov, case materials—including translated procedural documents—were submitted to the German Embassy in Kyiv. The results of their analysis raised serious concerns among diplomatic officials regarding the observance of the fundamental rights of German citizens on Ukrainian territory.
Following a thorough review, the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany officially acknowledged that the translations provided by the Ukrainian authorities contained significant errors.
On May 15, 2025, the Embassy formally submitted a note of protest to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine. The essence of this diplomatic protest lies not only in identifying gross translation inaccuracies, but also in demanding that the Ukrainian side ensure the involvement of qualified interpreters and translators, in line with the minimum standards set by the Council of Europe.
In effect, the note reflects a clear assertion that Ukraine has failed to uphold its international obligations with respect to the protection of foreign nationals’ rights—chiefly within the framework of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Such notes are recorded in diplomatic registers and, in the absence of an adequate response from the Ukrainian authorities, may serve as grounds for a direct appeal to institutions of the European Union and the Council of Europe. This could lead not only to a political assessment of Ukraine’s conduct in the context of its human rights obligations, but also to the creation of a precedent that may impact the country’s negotiating position in ongoing European integration processes.
The potential legal consequences for representatives of the Ukrainian prosecutor’s office who bear direct responsibility for these violations also warrant close attention. The text of the note explicitly states that the language rights of a German citizen were disregarded in proceedings before the Primorsky District Court of Odessa. Since all major procedural decisions were either initiated or actively supported by the state prosecution, personal responsibility may be attributed to Prosecutor Ruslan Voitov in connection with the violations identified.
What Is Known About Prosecutor Ruslan Voitov?
In the criminal proceedings against Sergej Engelmann, the prosecution is led by Ruslan Voitov, a prosecutor with the Odessa Regional Prosecutor’s Office. Since the arrest of the German journalist, Voitov’s actions have been the subject of repeated legal appeals and public criticism from the defense.
A key episode was Voitov’s signing and support of procedural decisions related to Engelmann’s pre-trial detention—despite the fact that the charges brought against him are not classified as serious, involve no identified victims, and are unsupported by any material damage. According to the defense, placing German journalist in a pre-trial detention facility under such circumstances, without consideration of alternative preventive measures, constitutes a form of blackmail and coercion, intended to compel him to incriminate himself and others in exchange for the promise of a more lenient pre-trial measure.
In addition, in June 2025, according to attorney Alexandr Babikov, Prosecutor Voitov insisted—prior to the commencement of a court hearing—that Engelmann waive his right to an interpreter and withdraw his request for the translation of legal documents into German. Such demands are in direct violation of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine and the standards enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights.
In light of these violations, the defense submitted an official complaint to the Office of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine and the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI), alleging that Prosecutor Ruslan Voitov had committed a criminal offense under Article 374 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (violation of the right to defense). However, the Prosecutor General’s Office declined to initiate an internal investigation or register criminal proceedings against its employee. This refusal has since been challenged in court.
Following its review of the complaint, the court ruled that the actions of the prosecutor’s office and the investigative body were unlawful and ordered them to register criminal proceedings and initiate a pre-trial investigation. At the time of publication, the court’s ruling had been forwarded for enforcement.
The legal dimension of the case is not the only aspect that raises serious concerns. During the analysis of the materials and circumstances surrounding Sergej Engelmann’s prosecution, the defense identified a number of indicators suggesting a possible conflict of interest and a lack of procedural independence on the part of Prosecutor Ruslan Voitov. Specifically, these include:
- Ruslan Voitov obtaining illegal disability status for vision impairment, which allowed him to receive state payments from the Pension Fund of Ukraine in the amount of approximately one million hryvnia;
- The use of a premium-class vehicle registered to a third party acting as a front;
- Concealment of assets and income sources in his electronic asset declaration;
- Possible indications of unlawful enrichment.
According to the defense, these circumstances may point to external influence over the prosecutor’s position in the case and help explain his pattern of procedural violations. The facts listed above will be incorporated into the criminal proceedings concerning the violation of Sergej Engelmann’s rights and will be subject to separate legal review under Articles 190, 364, 366-2, and 368-5 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
Thus, the actions of Prosecutor Ruslan Voitov in the Engelmann case may carry international legal significance, as such matters do not go unnoticed in European legal practice. Should it be established that the conduct of the Ukrainian prosecutor led to a restriction of access to legal defense or constituted a violation of an EU citizen’s right to a fair trial, this could serve as grounds for individual proceedings under the mechanisms of the Council of Europe.
New Prosecutor of the Odessa Region
Recently, a change in leadership took place within the Odessa Regional Prosecutor’s Office. Andrey Svatok was appointed as the new head of the regional prosecutor’s office.
This appointment may prove to be a turning point—not only for the investigation into the case of Sergej Engelmann, but also for the institutional credibility of the prosecutor’s office as a whole. The new prosecutor inherits a case that has attracted international attention, triggered formal legal action by the German government, and resulted in a court ruling mandating the initiation of criminal proceedings against one of his subordinates, Prosecutor Ruslan Voitov.
Today, it is Andriy Svatok’s position that will determine the next course of action. He may choose to initiate a process of legal restoration by launching an investigation into the violations committed by Prosecutor Ruslan Voitov, thereby helping to restore confidence in the prosecutor’s office—both within Ukrainian society and among international partners. Alternatively, he may opt to preserve the entrenched practice of invoking “prosecutorial immunity,” thus confirming, once and for all, that the system lacks any mechanism for internal accountability—even when subjected to pressure from international legal frameworks.
The new prosecutor now faces a clear choice: either to uphold the rule of law in this case or to align himself with those who have knowingly violated its principles. In the current context of diplomatic scrutiny, this decision may well serve as a measure of his personal integrity and professional competence.
