Remedica has firmly rejected corruption claims following the circulation of a controversial video linking the generics company to political donations to President Nikos Christodoulides. The Limassol-based firm stated that it has not made any political donations, emphasising transparency and integrity in its operations.
- Remedica's rejection of these claims underscores its commitment to ethical business practices and its clear stance against any insinuations of impropriety.
In a detailed statement released on Friday, Remedica clarified that neither it nor its holding company, LetterOne, had made payments to the president, countering the allegations made in the video that circulated on X. The company highlighted that it operates independently from its former shareholders, Mikhail Fridman and Petr Aven, both of whom are under EU sanctions.
Remedica asserted that the €75,000 mentioned in the video was a legitimate donation made in response to a government appeal for support following the devastating wildfires in the Limassol district in July 2025. This contribution was fully documented and aimed at aiding both victims of the fires and Remedica employees affected by the disaster.
The video features former energy minister Giorgos Lakkotrypis discussing the relationship between Remedica and its holding company, LetterOne. He suggested that the president was involved in assisting oligarchs under EU sanctions in exchange for payments, a claim that Remedica categorically denies.
Lakkotrypis’s comments, captured in a leaked sequence, refer to the sanctions imposed on Fridman and Aven in March 2022 following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The two businessmen resigned from LetterOne and froze their shares in response to these sanctions.
The video also shows the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) website listing the names of the sanctioned individuals. Lakkotrypis further mentioned a third individual, Andrei Kosogov, implying that efforts were made to ensure he remained unsanctioned.
According to Lakkotrypis, Remedica’s donation to the presidential palace was part of a broader strategy to gain the president’s attention, suggesting that such financial contributions could influence political relations.
Remedica’s rejection of these claims underscores its commitment to ethical business practices and its clear stance against any insinuations of impropriety.
