A Russian diamond mining employee has been sentenced to seven years in a maximum-security prison for allegedly providing financial support to Ukraine's Armed Forces through cryptocurrency transactions.
Local reports from the Mirninsky district of Yakutia claim the individual transferred funds to aid Ukrainian military operations, including intelligence and subversive activities against Russia.
According to the report, the man was instructed to send funds to a specific digital wallet after joining a group on a social media platform.
Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) confirmed that he was charged under Article 275 of the Russian Criminal Code, which pertains to treason through financial assistance to foreign entities or organizations acting against the nation’s security.
This incident underscores how cryptocurrencies are being utilized amidst the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. While the Ukrainian government has openly embraced digital currencies, accepting crypto donations to support its war efforts, Russian entities have also turned to cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin to navigate Western sanctions and sustain foreign trade operations.
The role of cryptocurrency in this geopolitical landscape highlights its dual-edged nature, serving both as a tool for economic resilience and a means to bypass traditional financial restrictions in times of war.
A U.S. court has handed down a 30-year prison sentence to Mohammed Azharuddin Chhipa, who was found guilty of financing terrorism through cryptocurrency.
A major chapter in crypto’s legal reckoning closed this week as Alex Mashinsky, once a prominent name in digital lending, received a 12-year prison sentence.
Former Celsius CEO Alex Mashinsky is asking for a significantly reduced prison sentence ahead of his May 8 sentencing, with his legal team pushing back hard against the U.S. Department of Justice’s call for a 20-year term.
The legal battle against the creators of Samourai Wallet has taken a sharp turn, as defense attorneys accuse federal prosecutors of suppressing a key legal interpretation from the Treasury Department that could dismantle the core of the government’s case.