General Cherry challenges the legality of FPV drone tenders based on TS: arguments of the company and its opponents

A conflict has emerged over the fibre-optic drone tender, which the Defence Procurement Agency (DPA) is conducting under a new procedure. General Cherry, one of the largest suppliers of such drones, has accused the DPA of a lack of transparency and of conducting the tender illegally. The manufacturer filed a corresponding lawsuit in court and also announced appeals to the NABU and the EU Delegation in Ukraine.

Volunteer Serhii Sternenko and Sternenko Community Foundation came to the defence of the tender. He accused General Cherry of attempting to block the tender because of “fear of fair competition”.

Defender Media spoke with the DPA and representatives of General Cherry and the Sternenko Community Foundation. Here, we explain what the conflict is about and what arguments its participants are putting forward.

How General Cherry is challenging the tender

On 27 August 2026, one of Ukraine’s largest UAV manufacturers, General Cherry, filed a lawsuit against the DPA with the Kyiv District Administrative Court. The move brought a previously closed dispute into the public domain. The dispute centres on the tender for fibre-optic FPV drones, which the DPA is conducting under a new procedure.

In its lawsuit, the manufacturer is seeking to have the DPA’s actions declared unlawful. It also wants the procurement cancelled until the procedure is brought into line with current legislation. According to Forbes, the case is being considered under simplified proceedings in electronic form, without the parties being summoned. As of 2 September, there is still no ruling in the court register. However, according to Defender Media sources, the court rejected the statement of claim.

General Cherry has also publicly announced that it will appeal to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau over indications of corruption in the tender. The company also plans to appeal to the EU Delegation over what it considers to be the unlawful and non-transparent conduct of the procurement.

In a comment to Defender Media, the Defence Procurement Agency said that cancelling or rerunning the procedure, as demanded by the manufacturer, “creates a direct risk of delays in the delivery of weapons to the military”.

The new procedure and the manufacturer’s claims

The Defence Procurement Agency announced the disputed tender on 20 August. According to Forbes estimates, the value of purchases under this tender could exceed UAH 20 billion. Funding will come through a €90 billion European Union loan.

The main difference is that, for the first time, the procurement of fibre-optic FPV drones is being conducted not for a specific model or brand, but according to a set of technical specifications. The same week, the DPA announced tenders based on TS for long-range drones and ground robotic systems.

“The technical requirements for the drones were developed by the Ministry of Defence together with the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, military experts and combat units themselves, based on practical experience at the frontline,” the DPA said in a comment to Defender Media. The agency says the change in approach is intended to “move away from the non-competitive selection of specific brands and open the market to a wider range of manufacturers”.

General Cherry claims that the tender conditions “show signs of discrimination and may have been tailored to a specific manufacturer”. The company’s main procedural complaint is that the DPA sent the documentation via email rather than through the open tender platform Prozorro. The manufacturer also objects to the fact that participants were given only four working days to prepare their proposals.

The company also points to inconsistencies in the technical specifications. The basic parameters — cruising speed, flight altitude and take-off weight — are not defined, while other indicators are “detailed far too narrowly”.

In its appeal to the NABU, General Cherry is demanding that criminal proceedings be opened. It also wants the actions of DPA and Defence Ministry officials investigated for signs of offences. The manufacturer claims there is a risk of corruption due to a non-transparent procedure and the tailoring of conditions to specific suppliers.

European loans are a key source of funding for the defence budget. The company is therefore also preparing an appeal to the EU Delegation in Ukraine. General Cherry is asking European diplomats to provide a legal assessment of the DPA’s actions and hold joint consultations.

At the same time, the company is insisting not on an open tender, but on the use of a special closed framework agreement module in Prozorro. This module was already used in August 2025.

The reaction of the Sternenko Community Foundation

The volunteer community and Serhii Sternenko’s charitable foundation have defended the DPA’s procedure and are openly criticising the manufacturer’s actions. They identify the possible leakage of confidential information as the main threat posed by using Prozorro for military procurement.

“Since Prozorro operates on the principle that ‘everyone sees everything’, there is a risk of disclosing the technical specifications of weapons and the addresses of production facilities to the enemy. The development of an alternative solution is already being completed by teams from the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Digital Transformation,” the Sternenko Community Foundation commented.

Former adviser to the Defence Minister and volunteer Serhii Sternenko directly accused General Cherry of attempting to block the tender for personal commercial interests because of “fear of fair competition”.

According to Sternenko, in 2024 and the first half of 2025, the company received contracts awarded without tenders, totalling approximately UAH 4.9 billion. The volunteer says he has information about “numerous complaints from military personnel regarding the low quality of the company’s products”.

At the same time, the manufacturer says that Delta system reports indicate its fibre-optic drones are among the most effective means of striking targets. They have also topped the ranking by the number of e-points awarded for five consecutive months.

“In terms of targets hit, we hold second place overall and during the day, while at night we have risen to third place among FPV systems,” the company said.

In particular, the AIR, SPEED and BULLET interceptors shot down 301 Shahed-like targets in July. In June, General Cherry interceptors destroyed more than 13,000 Russian “Molniya” drones.

Military and state risks

In a comment to Defender Media, the Defence Procurement Agency denied accusations of behind-the-scenes decision-making and restrictions on competition. The DPA cites Cabinet of Ministers Resolution No. 1275 as the legal basis for its actions. The resolution permits a special procedure for defence procurement and allows sensitive technical specifications, quantities, and equipment nomenclature not to be disclosed.

“Requests for proposals were sent to around 2,500 verified manufacturers, while a general announcement was posted on the Agency’s website, which resulted in dozens of proposals,” the DPA said.

The DPA also noted that participants had a full six calendar days to prepare their documents, from 20 to 26 August. The procurement procedure itself has also not yet been completed. Only the first stage of collecting proposals has closed. The next stage is an additional round of price reductions to determine the winner.

The court decision cited by the publication Babel also refers to these provisions. Government Resolution No. 1275 grants the contracting authority the authority to independently determine how to conduct such procedures. In addition, the manufacturer failed to prove that the technical requirements were discriminatory. Its rights were not violated because, despite its complaints, the company submitted its proposal and took part in the tender.

The DPA stresses that any significant delay or disruption to the tender threatens not only to delay the delivery of hundreds of thousands of drones to the frontline. It also risks undermining the trust of European partners and access to future international funding.

Defender Media will continue to follow the story.