The Capital Region regional press center has been officially opened in the Kyiv region, designed to become a new media and analytical hub for interaction between the media, the public, the authorities, and business.
The opening was organized by the My Kyiv Region news agency and the editorial office of the Slovo i Dilo newspaper. The event featured the presentation of work plans and an exhibition of works by Ukrainian artists from different regions of the Kyiv region.
The Capital Region press center aims to bring together journalists, social activists, entrepreneurs, cultural figures, and government officials to discuss and promote issues of recovery, reform, and regional development.
Key formats include round tables, discussions, interviews, press conferences, as well as sociological research and charity events. Significant attention will be paid to journalistic investigations and the study of foreign experience in the development of metropolitan areas.
At the opening, it was noted that on October 10, a press conference was held at the Interfax-Ukraine press center on the topic “The end of local government powers: what next and what are the risks for communities,” which underscores the Capital Region’s desire to become a point of intersection between the media environment and regional discussion.
The creation of such a press center in the Kyiv region is important not only as a local project, but also as a platform for consolidating information, strengthening ties between the public and the authorities, exchanging opinions, and formulating development strategies.
The activities of the Capital Region can strengthen the role of local media, improve the quality of analytics and communications in the region, and serve as a link between the capital and the region.
Against the backdrop of rapid growth in international gold prices, residents of a number of Asian countries really did rush to buy bullion — and in the first half of the day, stores sometimes closed by noon. Vietnamese people in a number of cities lined up at dawn when legislation finally abolished the state monopoly on gold trading.
Meanwhile, the price of gold has already surpassed $4,300 per ounce and continues to hit historic highs.
Growing expectations of a Fed interest rate cut and tensions in US-China relations have pushed investors toward “safe havens” — gold has become a safe asset. Against the backdrop of inflationary pressure and market volatility, the precious metal is once again in the spotlight for investors.
In Australia, at the peak of gold price growth, areas and rivers traditionally used by amateur gold miners (washing gold in river streams) are once again attracting attention. Some people are earning hundreds of dollars in just a few hours. This phenomenon is being covered by the media as a “gold renaissance” not only in the corporate sector, but also among mass investors.
Earlier, the Experts Club analytical center presented an analysis of the world’s leading gold-producing countries in its video on YouTube channel — https://youtube.com/shorts/DWbzJ1e2tJc?si=YuRnDiu7jtfUPBR9
The International Finance Corporation (IFC) will invest in the capital of Ukrainian insurance companies, which is a powerful signal for Ukrainian insurers and international companies.
This was discussed at a meeting between the leadership of the National Bank of Ukraine and World Bank President Ajay Banga and Managing Director of Operations Anna Bjerde, according to the NBU’s Facebook page.
It was emphasized that additional investment opportunities will be created with the help of MIGA (Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency), which provides guarantees for financing.
In addition, the meeting discussed further financial support for Ukraine, strengthening energy security, and increasing the country’s investment potential through the introduction of new financial instruments.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has recognized that M.S.L. does not have effective legal remedies for its complaints in Ukraine. This decision is the first substantive decision in the ECHR’s practice against Ukraine regarding the application of sanctions in accordance with the Ukrainian law “On Sanctions.”
As Elvira Lazarenko, a partner at the Barristers law firm, told the Interfax-Ukraine news agency, the relevant decision in the case of M.S.L., TOV v. UKRAINE” was published by the ECHR on October 16, 2025 (https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-245275%22]}).
Lazarenko noted that “today, there is a fairly well-established practice of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in ‘sanctions cases’, which states that there is limited possibility for judicial review of decisions by state bodies on the application of sanctions due to the discretionary powers of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine and the President of Ukraine to resolve issues of national security.”
“This practice has long been criticized by lawyers, as it demonstrated the de facto refusal of Ukrainian courts to review the factual grounds for the application of sanctions, i.e., a refusal to administer justice properly. The decision in M.S.L., TOV v. UKRAINE is important in that it raises questions about the limits of judicial review by Ukrainian courts of decisions on the application of sanctions and the possibility for courts to assess the significance of the risks that form the basis for the application of sanctions to individuals in accordance with the Ukrainian law “On Sanctions,” she said.
Lazarenko recalled that the case “M.S.L., TOV v. UKRAINE“ concerned the appeal by the company ”M.S.L.” against sanctions imposed on it by a decision of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine and enacted in 2015 by a decree of the President of Ukraine, with the subsequent extension of the sanctions by decrees in 2016 and 2017.
The applicant company complained that the imposition of sanctions, in particular the freezing of assets, constituted an interference with its rights guaranteed by Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, as it was prohibited from using and disposing of its assets. The applicant company also raised an issue under Article 13 of the Convention in connection with its lack of an effective remedy for the violation of its property rights.
At the national level, the Ukrainian courts dismissed the applicant company’s claim regarding the first Presidential Decree of Ukraine, and the company withdrew its claims regarding the second and third Decrees.
“In dismissing the company’s claim, the national courts refused to assess the factual grounds for the application of sanctions, referring to the discretionary powers of the authorities that had issued the contested decisions. The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court indicated that the scope and results of the president’s assessment of the significance of the risks that served as the basis for imposing sanctions on the applicant company are beyond the scope of judicial review, since the administrative court does not have the competence to make decisions on matters of national security and defense,” the lawyer explained.
She noted that, in appealing to the ECHR, the company claimed, in particular, that the national courts had failed to administer justice because they had not examined whether the state authorities had sufficient grounds for imposing sanctions and whether those grounds were supported by any evidence.
“Moreover, the restriction of the scope of judicial review was not based on any provision of national law. In the company’s opinion, the president’s discretionary powers on national security issues should not limit judicial review by national courts or exempt courts from the obligation to verify the grounds for sanctions in accordance with the sanctions law,” Lazarenko said.
The lawyer noted that the ECHR, in turn, pointed out that the decisions of the national courts lacked a substantive judicial assessment of the decision to impose sanctions on the applicant company. In particular, the Supreme Court limited its analysis to the sole question of whether the decision of the NSDC and the first presidential decree complied with the formal requirements of the sanctions law and did not address the substance of the SBU’s allegations against the applicant company.
“Due to the fact that the courts did not verify whether the first presidential decree had a solid factual basis, the ECHR concluded that such judicial review could not be considered a sufficient procedural guarantee against arbitrariness. Accordingly, the ECHR recognized the interference with the applicant company’s right to peaceful enjoyment of property as unlawful,” she said.
In addition, Lazarenko noted that the ECHR, referring to its conclusion about the lack of adequate procedural safeguards against arbitrariness during the judicial review of the decision to apply sanctions, as well as the ineffectiveness of the company’s complaints to the SBU, concluded that the applicant company did not have effective legal remedies for its complaints.
“Given the established status of ECHR practice as a source of law, we expect an appropriate response to the ECHR’s decision in M.S.L., TOV v. UKRAINE,“ from the Administrative Court of Cassation and the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, as the courts of first and appellate instance designated to review decisions on the application of sanctions,” the lawyer concluded.
Ukrzaliznytsia (UZ), subject to European and state co-financing, plans to implement the Mostytska-Sknyliv project in the next two years and further develop the Lviv-Uzhhorod -Chop and Lviv-Chernivtsi-Vadul-Siret (Romania), which will allow Ukraine to begin restoring and realizing its unique geographical status, said Oleg Yakovenko, director of the strategy and transformation department at Ukrzaliznytsia.
“We also plan to obtain grant funds for the Mostyska-Sknyliv project, which will connect 80 km of European gauge track between the Polish border and Lviv. Next, we are currently conducting technical and economic studies on the corridors connecting Lviv, Chernivtsi, and Romania,” Yakovenko said during the Kyiv International Economic Forum (KIEF) on Thursday, October 16.
According to him, as part of Ukraine’s integration into the European Union, UZ plans to develop 1435 mm gauge railways and European transport corridors on the territory of Ukraine. The European integration reform of the railway industry also envisages a radical change in the functioning of the entire railway model in Ukraine.
“First of all, we are talking about market reform, which involves separating the infrastructure operator within Ukrzaliznytsia from the transport operators. This will allow us to liberalize the market in the future. It will also allow us to create market mechanisms specifically for transport,” Yakovenko explained.
He named the introduction of European rules on technical compatibility and interoperability as another element of the reform. This concerns technical safety standards, as well as changes to the safety management system.
The director of the strategy and transformation department at Ukrzaliznytsia noted that a draft law “On the safety and interoperability of Ukraine’s rail transport” is currently planned to be submitted for adoption by the end of the year, while next year the company expects a law on market liberalization to be introduced.
As Yakovenko explained, it is expected that a so-called infrastructure access tariff will be formed, according to which market participants will be able to purchase certain access to transport routes from the infrastructure operator on a competitive basis.
“These tariffs will be regulated, i.e., they will be formed in accordance with the tariff formation procedure and will reflect economically justified tariffs in accordance with European rules,” emphasized the representative of Ukrzaliznytsia.
It is noted that the new system will introduce separate PSO (Public Service Obligation) contracts between passenger carriers and the state at the national level, as well as between carriers and local authorities. This should remove the financial burden from freight transport.
As reported, in September, a section of standard (“European”) 1435 mm gauge railway was opened between Uzhhorod and Chop in Zakarpattia Oblast, which will allow for direct rail connections between Uzhhorod and a number of European capitals.
In addition, in January 2025, it was reported that the reconstruction of the railway track on the section “Polish State Border – Mostyska II – Sknyliv (Lviv)” would be postponed until 2026, although in February 2024, the then Deputy Prime Minister for Recovery – Minister of Community, Territory and Infrastructure Development Oleksandr Kubrakov announced the start of construction by the end of 2024. Later it became known that Ukraine had failed to attract Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) funding for the project. It was reported that the US Agency for International Development (USAID) was considering financing 50% of the project’s cost, but it has since been liquidated.
CONSTRUCTION, EU, European gauge, GRANT, LVIV, UKRZALIZNYTSIA
Initial registrations of new and used buses (including minibuses) in Ukraine in September 2025 decreased by 6% compared to the same month last year, to 233 units, UkrAvtoprom reported on its Telegram channel.
Compared to August of this year, when 259 buses were registered, the market shrank by 10%.
The share of new vehicles in September’s volume was 58%, while last year it was 63%.
Domestic ZAZ buses took the lead among new buses with 38 vehicles registered, while in September 2024, these buses ranked third with 24 vehicles.
Second place went to new Ataman buses from the Cherkasy Bus factory, with 29 units, which also ranked second last year with sales of 37 vehicles.
Etalon buses came in third among new buses with 19 units, having been the leaders a year ago with 60 buses.
Among used buses, Mercedes-Benz was the most frequently registered in September with 49 units, followed by VDL and Van Hool with 8 units each.
According to UkrAvtoprom, a total of 1,888 buses were added to Ukraine’s bus fleet in January-September 2025 (+33% compared to the same period in 2024). Of these, 935 were new (+16%) and 953 were used (+56%).
As reported, in 2024, initial registrations of new and used buses decreased by 19% compared to 2023, to 2,241 units, including new buses by 24%, to 1,296 units, and used buses by 12%, to 945 units.
