Nathan Gill, the former leader of Reform UK in Wales and a one‑time ally of Nigel Farage in the European Parliament, has been jailed for 10 years and six months for taking bribes to deliver pro‑Russian statements while serving as an MEP.
Gill, 52, admitted accepting tens of thousands of pounds from a pro‑Kremlin Ukrainian politician in return for promoting Russian‑aligned narratives about Ukraine in the European Parliament and on Ukrainian television. Sentencing him at the Old Bailey in London on Friday, Mrs Justice Bobbie Cheema‑Grubb said he had allowed money to “corrupt [his] moral compass” and had “fundamentally compromised the integrity” of the Parliament.
Prosecutors said Gill took around £40,000, much of it in cash, from Oleg Voloshyn, a former Ukrainian MP and media commentator linked to sanctioned Putin ally Viktor Medvedchuk. In exchange, Gill agreed on at least eight occasions between December 2018 and July 2019 to read out or closely follow talking points drafted for him, attacking Kyiv and defending pro‑Russian interests.
He pleaded guilty in September to eight counts of bribery under the Bribery Act 2010. A separate count of conspiracy to commit bribery was left on file. The case, brought by the Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Command, is believed to be the first time a British politician has been convicted in the UK for taking foreign bribes to deliver political messaging.
The court heard that Gill used his platform as a Member of the European Parliament to criticise Ukraine’s government and its attempts to curb pro‑Russian media, and to question the treason prosecution of Medvedchuk, a prominent supporter of Vladimir Putin. He also repeated similar lines in paid appearances on 112 Ukraine, a television channel later banned by Kyiv as part of a pro‑Russian propaganda network.
Mrs Justice Cheema‑Grubb told him his offending had caused “profound harm” and was both “sophisticated” and “persistent”, motivated by financial gain and a desire to advance his own political profile. She said he had abused “a position of significant authority and trust” at a time when Russia, described in court as a “persistent hostile state”, was seeking to influence western democracies.
“When elected representatives succumb to clandestine inducements, public confidence in democracy is eroded,” she said. “Citizens cannot know whether what they are being told is an honest view or the product of disinformation bought and paid for by a foreign actor.”
Gill, from Anglesey in north Wales, showed little visible reaction as the sentence was handed down. His barrister, Peter Wright KC, told the court his client had a “lifelong history of commendable service” and held longstanding, if “misguided”, views about Russian‑speaking communities in eastern Ukraine, but accepted that taking cash payments was “utterly venal”. The judge said there was “scant personal mitigation” and that prior good character could not outweigh the seriousness of the offences.
The prosecution, led by Mark Heywood KC, said Gill’s conduct fell into the highest category of culpability for bribery: multiple offences over several months, each involving the expectation of several thousand pounds and carried out in secret through undeclared cash payments. On one occasion, Gill was offered €5,000 for an appearance on 112 Ukraine; on others, he expected what the prosecution described as “several thousand” euros or dollars per intervention.
Investigators estimated that Gill received roughly £40,000 in total, though the precise figure could not be determined. When police later searched his home, they recovered about €5,000 and what were described as “thousands of dollars” in cash, alongside electronic devices.
The bribery scheme came to light after Gill was stopped at Manchester Airport on 13 September 2021 as he prepared to fly to Moscow. He was detained under Schedule 3 of the Counter‑Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019, which gives officers powers to question and search individuals at ports and airports to determine whether they are engaged in hostile activity on behalf of a foreign state.
Officers from the Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Command seized Gill’s phone and other devices and conducted a parallel search of his Anglesey home. Digital forensic work uncovered extensive messaging between Gill and accounts attributed to Voloshyn, including encrypted and coded exchanges referring to “5K”, “x‑mas gifts”, “postcards” and a “small sack of paper gifts” – phrases prosecutors said were euphemisms for cash payments.
According to the prosecution, investigators then matched those messages against video and transcripts of Gill’s speeches and media appearances. On several occasions, the court heard, what Gill said in the European Parliament or on 112 Ukraine closely mirrored, or in parts repeated “almost verbatim”, scripts that had been sent to him in advance.
In one message after a parliamentary speech, Voloshyn allegedly told Gill he was “impressive” and “the perfect orator”. In others, the Ukrainian politician urged him not only to appear personally but to involve colleagues. After the 2019 European elections, messages showed Voloshyn asking Gill to book a room in Parliament for a presentation on Donbas linked to Medvedchuk’s circle, and to bring newly elected Brexit Party MEPs with him. Gill replied that he could “drag a few in to attend”.
Discussions also referred to a possible fee of “5K” if he could secure three MEPs for the event, with promises of a “small sack of paper gifts” afterwards. British politicians including former UKIP and Brexit Party figures Jonathan Arnott and David Coburn appeared on 112 Ukraine around the same time, but there is no evidence before the court that they were paid or knew of Gill’s arrangement, and they have not been accused of any wrongdoing.
Gill was first interviewed under caution in March 2022 and answered “no comment” throughout. The Crown Prosecution Service authorised charges in January this year, and he initially pleaded not guilty at Westminster Magistrates’ Court in February before changing his plea at the Old Bailey in September.
The foreign paymaster at the centre of the case, 44‑year‑old Oleg Voloshyn, is a former Ukrainian MP and television pundit long identified by Kyiv as a pro‑Kremlin figure. He has worked with or appeared on 112 Ukraine and other outlets later linked to Medvedchuk’s media empire. Voloshyn has been under UK and Canadian sanctions since 2022 and is wanted in Ukraine for alleged high treason. He is believed to be in Moscow.
Prosecutors in London have also authorised a charge of conspiracy to commit bribery against Voloshyn in relation to Gill’s conduct, but he has not been arrested. The Metropolitan Police said they had worked closely with European partners and the FBI, which seized and analysed electronic devices linked to Voloshyn at Washington Dulles airport in 2021, helping to attribute messages found on Gill’s phone.
Commander Dominic Murphy, head of the Met’s Counter Terrorism Command, said the case “goes to the heart of our democratic values”.
“This investigation has exposed how a hostile state actor sought to use money and covert influence to distort legitimate political debate,” he said in a statement. “It should send a clear message that foreign powers cannot buy access to our institutions or our representatives. It will not be tolerated.”
The period of offending predates the UK’s National Security Act 2023, which introduced new foreign interference offences and a mandatory foreign influence registration scheme, and Gill was therefore prosecuted under existing bribery legislation. Ministers have nonetheless seized on the case as evidence of the threats the new law is intended to tackle.
Security minister Dan Jarvis described Gill’s conduct as “a betrayal of national security” and said the government was bringing forward further measures “to disrupt and deter interference from foreign states” in political life.
Politically, the conviction has opened a fresh row over the influence of Russia in British politics and the record of Reform UK, which current polls suggest is leading national voting intention by a significant margin. Gill sat in the European Parliament from 2014 for UKIP and later the Brexit Party under Farage’s leadership, before becoming Reform UK’s leader in Wales ahead of the 2021 Senedd elections. He resigned from the party later that year and is no longer a member.
Reform UK said in a statement that Gill’s behaviour was “reprehensible, treasonous and unforgivable”, and insisted he had acted entirely alone. The party said it “fully welcomed” the sentence and had long since cut ties with him.
Nigel Farage, who has faced past criticism for calling Putin the world leader he “most admires” and for presenting on the Russian state channel RT before its UK ban, has described Gill as a “bad apple” and said any party could find it had “terrible people” in its ranks. He has rejected suggestions that Gill’s case reflects a wider problem within Reform UK or his political circle.
Opposition parties urged a broader inquiry into Russian interference in British politics and the activities of Farage‑aligned parties over the past decade. Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey branded Gill “a traitor” and called Reform UK “a danger to national security”, demanding a full, independent investigation into Russian links across Westminster and beyond.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the case “demands that Nigel Farage investigate how that happened within his party, and to come clean about what other links there are between his party and Russia”. Labour is pressing for a comprehensive review of Reform UK’s donors, senior figures and governance.
Security agencies have for several years warned that Russia remains the “most acute” state threat to the UK, including through covert funding, disinformation campaigns and efforts to cultivate politicians, journalists and academics as proxies. Previous controversies have included allegations of Russian‑linked money entering British politics and the exposure of individuals accused of acting on behalf of foreign powers.
Officials say that, had Gill’s conduct occurred today, it might also have been chargeable under the new foreign interference offences created by the National Security Act. Those provisions, which are being phased in alongside a foreign influence registration scheme, are designed explicitly to capture covert, directed political influence work carried out for overseas governments or their proxies.
For now, however, Gill’s case stands as a landmark under existing bribery law, highlighting both the vulnerabilities of democratic institutions and the willingness of hostile actors to exploit them.
Gill will serve half of his 10‑and‑a‑half‑year sentence in custody before being considered for release on licence, subject to standard rules. There was no immediate indication of whether he intends to appeal.
Calls for further inquiries into Russian influence, and for Reform UK to submit to greater transparency over funding and foreign contacts, are expected to intensify in the coming days as political opponents seek to use the case to raise broader questions about the party’s fitness for office.