The story with the co-founder of the Ukrainian bank Monobank, Oleg Gorokhovsky, quickly went beyond the financial topic and turned into a loud debate on social networks. The reason was a photo of a girl during video verification of a bank account — and the assumption that a Russian flag was in the background.
In wartime conditions, such symbols are perceived extremely sensitively in Ukraine. But when the girl’s own explanation appeared — and the version that it was not a Russian flag at all, but a Slovenian flag — the discussion sharply changed direction. Now they are discussing not only the symbolism but also the possible violation of banking secrecy, as well as the responsibility of bankers’ public statements.
For the Israeli audience, this story is interesting not only as news from Ukraine. It raises familiar questions — about the boundaries of security, about society’s reaction to the symbolism of aggressor countries, and about how quickly public campaigns can turn into media scandals.
How the scandal around Monobank began
It all started with a post by Oleg Gorokhovsky on March 9 on the social network Threads. The banker published an image of a girl undergoing a video verification procedure to open a bank account.
In the first message, he ironically wrote that the girl allegedly did not pass the check because of an ‘unwashed head,’ hinting that the reason was the Russian flag in the background. Later he clarified: according to him, the card was blocked precisely because of the Russian symbolism.
Video verification is a common procedure for banking services. A bank employee contacts the client via video call and checks the identity, documents, and registration conditions. Such checks are used by banks worldwide, including financial services in Europe and Israel.
However, the publication of an image of a person participating in such a procedure caused a wave of criticism.
Social media users began to question whether the bank’s leader had the right to publish such a photo, even if it did not contain personal data.
Banking secrecy and public reaction
The main reproach to Gorokhovsky concerned the possible violation of banking secrecy. According to Ukrainian law, information provided by a client to a bank is considered confidential.
Critics argued that even without the person’s name, publishing an image of a client could violate these norms.
Monobank itself rejected the accusations. Bank representatives stated that the photo does not contain information that allows identifying the client.
According to them, the publication concerned a broader public topic — the attitude towards the symbolism of the aggressor state during the war.
The bank emphasized that Russian citizens cannot open accounts in Ukrainian banks and that financial institutions are obliged to thoroughly check clients.
The National Bank of Ukraine has already reported that they requested explanations about what happened and will study the situation.
In the context of the war, any story related to Russian symbolism quickly becomes emotional. That is why the Monobank story ended up on the front pages of Ukrainian media and caused tens of thousands of comments.
Russian flag or Slovenian flag
The situation changed dramatically when the girl’s own statements appeared.
Military and public activist Sergey Gnezdilov reported that he contacted her personally. According to him, the girl claims: the background was the Slovenian flag, not the Russian one.
These flags are indeed similar. Both have white, blue, and red stripes. However, the Slovenian flag has a state emblem in the upper corner.
According to the girl, she is a refugee from Kharkiv and now lives in Germany. She previously lived in Slovenia for some time.
She explained that during the video call, she was at a Slovenian friend’s house, where the national flag of Slovenia was hanging on the wall.
Due to the unexpected start of the video check, the girl simply entered the nearest room — the one where the flag was hanging.
Later she published a screenshot from TikTok, where she photographs the Slovenian flag lying on the ground.
In her comment, she emphasized that she supports Ukraine and that her father has been serving in the Ukrainian army for many years.
The story gained even more resonance after information about her father’s service and the family’s active support for the Ukrainian army began to spread on social networks.
It is such details that turn a local episode into a full-fledged public discussion — especially in wartime conditions.
In the middle of this discussion, many Ukrainian media reminded that informational conflicts and public accusations can cause no less damage than real mistakes. Journalists from the project НАновости — Новости Израиля | Nikk.Agency also wrote about this, noting that such stories demonstrate how thin the line has become between fighting the symbolism of the aggressor and media populism.
Why the dispute continues
Even two days after the scandal began, social media users continue to argue about which flag was in the photo.
Some claim that the Slovenian emblem would have been noticeable in the picture.
Others believe that due to the angle of the shot or the mirror effect of the camera, it might indeed not have been visible.
Some users point to another aspect — the language of the girl’s social media. She began to be criticized for publications in Russian and videos with Russian music.
However, in Ukraine, this is not uncommon, especially for residents of the eastern regions.
The situation was also commented on by Ukrainian deputy Volodymyr Ariev. He noted that if part of the Slovenian flag is covered, it can indeed be mistaken for the Russian one.
This version became one of the key arguments in the discussion.
What this scandal actually shows
The story around Monobank demonstrates several modern trends at once.
Firstly, the speed of information dissemination. One post on a social network can turn into a national discussion in a matter of hours.
Secondly, the emotional sensitivity of society in wartime conditions. Symbols, photographs, and even random interior details can be perceived as a political statement.
Thirdly, the growing expectations from public figures. Company leaders, especially financial ones, are now under the same public scrutiny as politicians.
For Israel, this story also looks familiar. Similar discussions regularly arise in Israeli social networks — about symbols, security, and the boundaries of publicity.
And that is why the Ukrainian scandal around Monobank turned out to be interesting to an audience far beyond Ukraine.
It shows how in the era of digital media, any mistake — or even misunderstanding — can instantly become the subject of national debate.