David Coburn, the former leader of UKIP Scotland and later a Brexit Party MEP, has found himself at the center of a swirling controversy over alleged Russian influence in British and European politics. His name surfaced in court documents and WhatsApp messages, raising uncomfortable questions about the extent of Russian attempts to sway European lawmakers. Yet, Coburn has firmly denied any wrongdoing, and, as of now, no evidence has been presented to show he accepted any bribes.
The drama began in earnest when Nathan Gill, a former MEP who led both UKIP and Reform UK’s Welsh branch, was sentenced on November 21, 2025, to ten and a half years in prison. According to the BBC, Gill admitted to eight counts of bribery after taking £40,000 from Oleg Voloshyn, a former pro-Russian MP in Ukraine, in exchange for making pro-Russian statements and giving interviews to media outlets linked to Viktor Medvedchuk—a Ukrainian oligarch and close ally of Vladimir Putin.
Gill’s conviction was the result of a long investigation and a trove of digital evidence, including WhatsApp messages seized from his phone. These messages, detailed in documents submitted by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to London’s Old Bailey, included discussions about payments not just to Gill himself, but apparently to another MEP referred to as “D” or “David.” The implication was clear enough: money was being earmarked for at least one other parliamentarian, and the only “David” publicly involved with the so-called “editorial board” of the pro-Russian TV channels was David Coburn.
“I’m seeing D in morning. How much was for him?” Gill wrote to Voloshyn in a message dated April 3, 2019, two months after Coburn had left UKIP and joined the Brexit Party. Voloshyn replied “6.5 USD”—interpreted as $6,500, or about £5,000. After some back and forth, Voloshyn confirmed, “and other 2 for David you have already with you.” These cryptic exchanges fueled speculation about the extent of the bribery scheme and who else might have been involved.
The BBC, which has led much of the reporting on the case, noted that both Coburn and another former UKIP and Brexit Party MEP, Jonathan Arnott, had traveled with Gill to Ukraine in October 2018. There, they visited two pro-Russian TV channels, 112 Ukraine and NewsOne—both linked to Medvedchuk. All three later spoke up for these broadcasters during a European Parliament debate in December 2018. Gill’s speech, it was revealed, had been sent to him by Voloshyn in exchange for money, while Coburn and Arnott echoed similar talking points.
In Strasbourg, Coburn told the chamber, “The president of Ukraine and the Rada parliament are plotting to close TV channels 112 and Channel One. Can this chamber truthfully say Ukraine, which behaves this way, is ready for EU entry?” This line of argument, centered on press freedom, closely mirrored the Russian government’s narrative about Ukraine at the time. Yet, as the BBC emphasized, there is no evidence Coburn was aware of the Kremlin links behind the TV channels or that he received any payment for his remarks.
When confronted by BBC journalists at his home in rural northern France, Coburn was unequivocal. Asked directly if he had ever been paid to give a pro-Russian speech, he replied, “No.” He has not responded to further written requests for comment, but maintains his innocence. The BBC also reported that it had not seen any evidence Coburn was directly offered or had received money.
Jonathan Arnott, for his part, has said that if Gill had ever offered him money, he would have gone to the police. He insisted that he criticized Russia in his own speech and dismissed the notion that he was acting on Moscow’s behalf as “provably nonsensical.”
Still, the WhatsApp messages and the court documents have prompted the Metropolitan Police’s counter terrorism unit, led by Commander Dominic Murphy, to widen its investigation. “It does appear in some of the conversations that there has been money put aside to allow other individuals to be paid for their services,” Murphy told the BBC before Gill’s sentencing. However, the Met Police has confirmed that nobody else has been arrested or interviewed under caution, and their investigation “remains ongoing.”
The story has also drawn in current political leaders. Prime Minister Keir Starmer called for Reform UK leader Nigel Farage—the former UKIP and Brexit Party boss—to “launch an investigation into his party urgently” to determine if there are further links to Russia. Farage responded that he was “very confident, as confident as I can be,” that no one else in his parties, past or present, had engaged in behavior similar to Gill’s. He added, “I’m not a police force,” but supported the idea of a broader investigation by MI5 into Russian and Chinese interference in British politics.
Oleg Voloshyn, the intermediary at the heart of the bribery scheme, was sanctioned by both the US and UK governments in 2022 for promoting Russian foreign policy objectives and undermining Ukraine’s government. Medvedchuk, the oligarch behind the TV channels, was identified by Judge Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb as the “ultimate source of the requests and the money” Gill received. Voloshyn, who was a co-defendant in Gill’s bribery case, has not been charged in the UK because he is not in the country. The US government has called him a “pawn” of the FSB, Russia’s security service.
The pro-Russian TV channels at the center of the scheme, 112 Ukraine and NewsOne, were shut down in 2021 by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as part of a crackdown on Russian influence. The BBC reported that Gill had also been bribed to organize interviews with other MEPs for these outlets, though the court found no evidence that those MEPs were aware of the bribery.
For now, David Coburn’s name remains in the headlines, but the evidence against him is circumstantial at best. He has not been arrested or charged, and he continues to deny any involvement in the bribery scheme. The Met Police’s investigation is ongoing, and the political reverberations from the Gill affair are likely to continue for some time. The case has laid bare the vulnerabilities of European institutions to foreign influence—and the difficulties in distinguishing legitimate advocacy from covert manipulation.
As the investigation continues, the pressure is on both law enforcement and political parties to root out any lingering traces of foreign interference, while ensuring that innocent individuals are not unjustly smeared by association. The coming months may provide more answers—but for now, Coburn’s denial stands, and the search for the full truth goes on.
