Cryptocurrency exchange Binance provided Russian authorities with information about cryptocurrency donations made to Ukrainian fundraising campaigns, according to law-enforcement documents reviewed by Reuters. The information was subsequently used as evidence in a terrorism-financing case against a Russian IT specialist.
The disclosure has raised questions about Binance’s handling of customer information after the company announced that it had fully withdrawn from Russia in 2023.
The case also highlights the complicated legal and privacy issues facing global cryptocurrency exchanges, particularly when customers’ transactions involve politically sensitive causes and governments with conflicting legal requirements.
Russian authorities used donation records as evidence
Russian investigators allege that IT specialist Yuri Belenkiy sent more than $700 in cryptocurrency to the Ukrainian military and an affiliated organization that has been designated by Moscow as a terrorist organization.
Belenkiy was detained in September 2025, and Russia’s Investigative Committee formally accused him of terrorism financing in October.
According to law-enforcement documents, information obtained from Binance concerning cryptocurrency transactions was used as part of the evidence against him.
Belenkiy, who holds a Russian passport and a Bulgarian residence permit, remains in a Russian prison awaiting trial.
Binance had already announced its Russia exit
The case is particularly controversial because Binance announced in 2023 that it had completely exited the Russian market.
That raises questions about why the company continued to provide information concerning a Russian customer to Russian authorities and whether it was legally required—or permitted—to do so.
Several Russian citizens have used cryptocurrency exchanges in recent years to donate money to organizations and causes that Moscow later classified as extremist or terrorist.
Rights activists who monitor such cases say dozens of people have subsequently faced prosecution or convictions in Russia over similar donations, although Reuters said it could not independently establish the exact number.
Debate over Binance’s legal obligations
Mike Bystrov, founder of crypto-regulation law firm Stellar Consulting, argued that Binance may not have been obligated to provide the information after leaving Russia.
He also suggested that European Union data-protection rules could potentially have prevented the company from sharing certain customer information with Russian authorities.
However, Binance strongly disputes that interpretation.
The company said it does not determine whether a person should be prosecuted or decide how governments use information obtained during investigations.
A Binance spokesperson said the exchange, like other global financial institutions, cooperates with lawful law-enforcement requests around the world, while taking applicable privacy, regulatory and legal requirements into account.
The company emphasized that decisions regarding criminal charges and the use of information remain the responsibility of government authorities.
EU privacy questions remain unresolved
Reuters contacted the European Data Protection Board regarding the case, but the EU body declined to comment on the specific circumstances.
The board said enforcement of data-protection rules falls primarily to the relevant authorities in individual European countries.
That leaves an important legal question unresolved: whether Binance’s decision to provide the information complied with European privacy requirements, particularly given the company’s stated withdrawal from Russia.
Broader implications for crypto users
The case illustrates a growing tension within the cryptocurrency industry.
Crypto exchanges operate internationally and often hold detailed information about customers, including transaction histories and identity records. Governments can seek access to those records as part of criminal investigations, but the legal obligations surrounding such requests can become complicated when transactions cross borders or involve countries subject to sanctions and geopolitical disputes.
For users, the case also demonstrates that cryptocurrency transactions are not necessarily anonymous.
Blockchain transactions can often be traced, while centralized exchanges such as Binance may hold identifying information linking transactions to individual customers.
A politically sensitive case
The situation is particularly sensitive because the donations involved Ukraine and were subsequently interpreted by Russian authorities as terrorism financing.
Moscow has designated the Azov organization referenced in the case as a terrorist organization, while Ukraine and its supporters reject Russia’s characterization.
The First Corps Azov of the Ukrainian National Guard said it does not disclose donor identities. Ukraine’s armed forces and presidential administration did not respond to requests for comment, while the Kremlin and Russia’s Investigative Committee also did not respond.
The larger issue for Binance
The case could add to scrutiny of how Binance handles customer information in jurisdictions where it no longer officially operates.
The company maintains that it responds to legitimate legal requests in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Critics, however, may question whether providing data to authorities in a country from which Binance says it has withdrawn creates additional privacy and human-rights concerns.
Ultimately, the case is about more than one Russian crypto user. It raises broader questions about how international cryptocurrency exchanges should balance law-enforcement cooperation, customer privacy and human-rights considerations when governments request financial data—especially amid an ongoing geopolitical conflict.
