Operation "Self-Inflicted Wound 2": How Online Media SD.UA Sent an Ultimatum from a Deleted Mailbox While the SBU Inspects Their Overseer's PC

Less than twenty-four hours after the disclosure of investigation records regarding budget allocations by the Luhansk Regional Military Administration (OVA), the subsidized media pool responded in a synchronized fashion.

On October 30, the publisher of "IRTA-FAX" (NGO "Vilny Skhid") sent an ultimatum demanding a retraction of our findings. On November 1, a matching letter was delivered on behalf of the NGO "Severodonetsk Online" (SD.UA platform).

The correspondence features identical legalistic clichés, intimidation tactics, and demands generated from a single template. Behind this posture lies a reluctance to accept individual accountability.

Collective Facade: Who Refuses to Sign Personally?

In their demands, both editorial boards rely on corporate shields: “The Editorial Board,” “The Publisher,” or a generic “NGO.” No personal signatures appear on the documents.

Why do the executives of these entities avoid signing their names?

• Where is the signature of Sergiy Fomenko, founder, administrator, and managing editor of "IRTA-FAX," who oversees advertising and technical operations?
• Where are the signatures of NGO "Vilny Skhid" director Natalia Zhdaniuk or the project’s co-founder and legal counsel, Viktor Zhdaniuk?
• Why does the SD.UA demand lack the personal signature of NGO "Severodonetsk Online" head Andriy Nidchenko or editor-in-chief Yana Mostova, who directs editorial workflows?

Putting one's name to contracts involving diverted public funds carries personal legal risk. Regional administration supervisors continue to leverage these platforms to shield administrative irregularities.

"Write in Fine Print": An Ultimatum Issued from a Non-Existent Mailbox

The exchange took an unexpected turn when our newsroom transmitted an official legal response.

In its letter, the NGO "Severodonetsk Online" requested: “We await receipt confirmation and a reasoned response... to the address severodonetsk.online@gmail.com”.

Our team drafted a detailed legal rejection (Ref. No. 01/11 dated Nov 2, 2026). Upon transmission, the Google mail server returned a delivery error:

“550 5.1.1 The email account that you tried to reach does not exist.”

This indicates two primary possibilities:

1. Disposable Account: The senders created online@gmail.com solely to issue demands, deleting the mailbox immediately afterward to obstruct official replies and claim lack of engagement.
2. Immediate Google Suspension: If the operators issued high-volume bulk correspondence within a short timeframe, Gmail's automated security algorithms may have flagged the activity as abusive and permanently terminated the account.

Despite receiving substantial public communication contracts, this network failed to maintain a functioning email channel for official correspondence.

"That Is the Condition": The Recorded Procurement Admission by Albina Kusheleva

SD.UA asserts that receiving regional administration funds was entirely coincidental, demanding proof of coordinated procurement.

That narrative is contradicted by recorded telephone statements from Albina Kusheleva, Director of the Department of Information Policy of the Luhansk Regional Administration and former secretary of the "Transparency and Accountability" task force, whose office computer was seized by the SBU:

Journalist: “Does the mandatory list of seven specific media outlets in the tender terms restrict competition?”

1. Kusheleva: “This is an indicative list...”

Journalist: “No, the tender documentation explicitly states that the winning bidder must contract with at least four outlets from that list!”

1. Kusheleva: “If the tender winner cannot distribute information across more than four media outlets [from this list], they will not be declared the winner! That is the condition to maximize regional support... That is the condition”.

Journalist: “The conditions require contracts with at least four out of these seven: Surovy Sever, Luhanshchyna Operatyvna, Starobilsk Life, SD.UA, IRTA-FAX, Luhanshchyna-UA... And what about Sole Proprietor Smetankin, is he a media outlet?”

1. Kusheleva: “Well, I am traveling right now and cannot speak comfortably...”

Following this exchange, the Luhansk Administration canceled the second tender results without explanation, subsequently announcing a third tender where the same individual, Smetankin, entered as a secondary participant.

Restricting eligibility to an approved group of seven platforms—where reproducing a standard press release was billed at 1,160 UAH—constitutes documented procurement manipulation.

Who Is Next?

To date, identical retractions have been demanded by only two beneficiaries: NGO "Vilny Skhid" and NGO "Severodonetsk Online."

Will the remaining entities selected by Kusheleva's department also submit demands? Are similar notices forthcoming from Tribun, Surovy Sever, or Luhanshchyna Operatyvna?

All records—including the paired demands, server bounce notices, public contract data, and the recorded audio admission—have been submitted as evidence in case No. 160/34036/26 before the Dnipropetrovsk District Administrative Court.