Hungarian tax authority suspends investigation into Ukrainian bank convoy case, as no evidence of crime found

The Hungarian National Tax and Customs Administration (NAV) has essentially concluded its investigation into the case of the Ukrainian cash-in-transit, having carried out all investigative measures deemed necessary within Hungary, according to a statement.

“Based on the findings so far, there is no indication that a crime was committed, but a response from the Austrian investigative authorities is still needed to definitively close the case; therefore, until that response is received, the NAV has suspended the investigation.”

The NAV previously launched an investigation on suspicion of money laundering based on a tip from the Constitution Protection Office and a referral from the Office of the Prosecutor General. A key element of the report forwarded to the NAV was that the cash and gold being transported through the territory of Hungary were of unknown origin. At the NAV’s request, in the first half of April, the Prosecutor’s Office issued a European Investigation Order to the Republic of Austria requesting clarification about the origin of the funds. Given that the NAV is no longer conducting further investigative activities, but a response to their request for assistance has not yet been received, the investigating authority has suspended the criminal procedure, according to the statement.

A comprehensive internal review conducted by the agency within its own scope of authority about the Ukrainian cash-in-transit case—examining whether all procedural and investigative steps were carried out in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and in compliance with internal procedural rules—is still ongoing.

What is this case?

On March 5, operatives of the Counterterrorism Center (Terrorelhárítási Központ-TEK) detained seven Ukrainian citizens near Budapest and seized gold and foreign currency worth more than 27 billion forints from the CIT vehicles they were escorting. According to the Prosecutor's Office, they acted in response to a tip. It was later revealed that the source of the tip was one of the intelligence agencies, the Constitutional Protection Office, which was prompted by information gathered from another agency, the Information Office.

The lawyer for the Ukrainian cash couriers later reported at a press conference that, to their knowledge, only members of the TEK were present during the raid—contrary to the official report—and that the NAV only initiated proceedings in the case later. According to the Ukrainians’ lawyer, the recipient of the money—the Ukrainian savings bank Oschadbank—and the Austrian Raiffeisen Bank, which had sent the funds, there was nothing unusual about the shipment, and the cash couriers were in possession of the proper permits required for transporting it from Austria to Ukraine.

This did not prevent the Orbán government and its propaganda machine from claiming that there was a problem with the shipment, that money laundering may have been involved, and that the money might even be linked to the financing of the Tisza Party—but to date, no evidence has been presented to support these accusations and insinuations. On March 10, a government decree was issued stating that “the legal title to the assets seized from the Ukrainian money-transporting vehicles could not be clarified on the spot.”

Telex was the first to report that it was Viktor Orbán who had decided to intercept the Ukrainian “gold convoy,” and even the timing of the raid was decided at the highest levels of government. However, according to sources familiar with the details of the operation against the “gold convoy” who spoke to Telex, there was no professional justification for the raid. A prosecutor who was granted access to the secret service’s files concluded that “the Constitution Protection Office did not substantiate the claims of a national security risk with sufficient evidence.”

In early May, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced that the shipment seized in Hungary had been returned to Ukraine. “I am grateful to Hungary for its constructive attitude and this civilized step,” the Ukrainian president said. According to Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha, the return of the shipment is a sign of the new Hungarian government’s constructive approach.

At the end of June, 444 reported that it had obtained a photo of an allegedly official document from the prosecutor’s office dated June 9, which lists the individuals whose involvement in the so-called “gold convoy” case needed to be clarified. After the publication of the article, Péter Magyar indicated on his social media page that, based on the leaked document, he expected an immediate answer from the prosecutor’s office as to whether Viktor Orbán and János Hajdu had been questioned as suspects in the case.

János Hajdu, a former police lieutenant general who was dismissed from his post as head of the Counterterrorism Center at the end of May, was finally questioned as a suspect by the Budapest Investigative Prosecutor’s Office on June 29. The office informed Hajdu that he was suspected of seven counts of unlawful detention involving the tormenting of the victim; he filed a complaint against the charges and did not admit to having committed the crime.