Kenya’s DCI Opens Probe on Russian Man Who Secretly Filmed Sex Escapades With Women — But There’s a Slim Chance They’ll Ever Get Him

NAIROBI — On the morning of Valentine’s Day, dozens of Kenyan women woke up to discover that private, intimate footage of themselves had been uploaded to a paid Telegram channel by a man they had believed was simply an unusually friendly Russian tourist.

By the following Tuesday, Kenya’s Directorate of Criminal Investigations had launched a formal probe. By Wednesday, the suspect — a 30-something self-styled ‘pick-up artist’ and online blogger identified by African and Russian media as Vyacheslav Trahov, known online as Yaytseslav — appeared to have already left the continent.

The case has ignited a furious debate across East and West Africa about consent, digital exploitation, and the gaping jurisdictional holes that allow foreign nationals to commit technology-facilitated crimes against African women and then walk away — often with impunity.

But for all the government press releases, ministerial condemnations, and Interpol promises, experts and legal analysts say the odds of Trahov ever standing trial in Nairobi — or Accra — are extraordinarily slim. The reason is both simple and maddeningly immovable: the Russian constitution.

The Method: A Pair of Sunglasses, a Telegram Channel, and Thousands of Subscribers

According to multiple reports and accounts from victims, Trahov’s modus operandi was elegant in its brazenness. He would approach women in shopping malls, markets, and on public streets — in Nairobi, Accra, Lagos, and Johannesburg, among other cities — opening conversations with compliments, asking for phone numbers, and inviting women back to his rented apartment. What the women did not know was that he was wearing a pair of sunglasses fitted with a concealed camera, recording the entire encounter.

The footage — edited to imply sexual encounters — was then uploaded behind a subscription paywall on Telegram, where, according to investigators and online sleuths, he monetized the videos for profit. One woman who appeared in the clips, identified only as Dora, went on TikTok to clarify that the video had been edited to misrepresent what actually happened. Another woman, a stylist, stated categorically that she had no idea she was being filmed. ‘I just saw the video on social media and I was shocked,’ she told local media.

When confronted on Telegram about the allegations, Trahov was dismissive. ‘I didn’t do anything illegal. These are just travel memories,’ he reportedly told his followers. It is a framing that legal scholars describe as not only morally bankrupt but factually wrong under the laws of every country in which he allegedly operated.

A Continent-Wide Pattern

What makes this case particularly alarming is its geographic scale. Investigators and online researchers have traced Trahov’s alleged activities to South Africa, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda, and Tanzania — suggesting not a spontaneous crime of opportunity but a deliberate, continent-spanning scheme. Ghana, where the scandal first broke into public consciousness, is leading the charge. On Saturday, February 14, Ghana’s Minister of Communications, Digital Technology and Innovation, Samuel Nartey George, held an emergency press conference in Accra and issued a direct invitation to the Russian ambassador for urgent talks.

Even as George spoke, Ghanaian officials quietly acknowledged that preliminary investigations suggested Trahov had likely already left the country. That detail did not temper the minister’s rhetoric. ‘We will activate every resource at our disposal, working with Interpol,’ George declared. ‘We want the gentleman to be brought back to Ghana, extradited, for him to face the rigours of our law.’

In Kenya, the Directorate of Criminal Investigations issued a statement on February 17 confirming a ‘comprehensive inquiry’ had begun, including the activation of a specialized cybercrime and gender-based violence investigations unit. ‘We are deeply concerned about the reported circulation of intimate content involving Kenyan women, which is a clear violation of privacy, dignity, and the law,’ the DCI said, urging victims to come forward in confidence. Kenya’s Gender Cabinet Secretary Hanna Wendot Cheptumo invoked Articles 28 and 31 of the Kenyan Constitution — protecting personal dignity and privacy — and called the incident ‘an affront to our national values, cultural integrity, and the safety of women and girls.’ To compound the scandal, a second Russian man, Alex Ananasik, was separately exposed this week for producing similar content about Kenyan women, with an active OnlyFans account reportedly earning him thousands of dollars.

The Law on Paper: Up to 25 Years in Ghana, Two in Kenya

On paper, the legal consequences for Trahov could be severe. Ghana’s Cybersecurity Act 2020 is among the most stringent on the continent: the non-consensual publication of intimate images of adults or children carries a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison. Ghana has precedent for enforcement — in 2022, a court sentenced a 22-year-old phone technician named Solomon Doga to 14 years behind bars for sharing nude images of a Lebanese woman. Kenya’s Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act provides for a maximum of two years’ imprisonment for equivalent offenses — a sentence critics have long described as inadequate for the psychological devastation non-consensual intimate image abuse inflicts on victims.

The disparity between those sentences underscores a broader policy failure. While Ghana has clearly treated this category of offense with appropriate seriousness, Kenya’s comparatively modest maximum penalty signals a legal framework still catching up with the realities of digital-age exploitation. Feminist legal advocates in Nairobi have spent years calling for harsher penalties; the Trahov case has given that campaign new, painful urgency.

The Wall That Is Article 61: Russia’s Constitutional Shield

Here is where the diplomatic aspirations of Kenya and Ghana crash against hard, constitutional bedrock. Article 61, Paragraph 1 of the Russian Federation’s constitution is unambiguous: ‘A citizen of the Russian Federation may not be deported from Russia or extradited to another state.’ This is not a matter of political will or diplomatic mood. It is the supreme law of the Russian Federation, and it has been invoked repeatedly across decades to shield Russian nationals accused of serious crimes abroad — from the alleged poisoners of Alexander Litvinenko in London to the election-meddling operatives indicted by Robert Mueller’s team in Washington.

Vladimir Putin himself, in a 2018 NBC interview, made Russia’s position impossible to misread: Russia will ‘never’ extradite its citizens. Neither Kenya nor Ghana has an extradition treaty with Moscow, removing even the theoretical framework within which such a transfer could be negotiated. The Russian Embassy in Ghana, when contacted about the case, issued a carefully worded statement acknowledging it had ‘taken note’ of media reports — the diplomatic equivalent of a shrug.

Ghana’s Technology Minister George acknowledged the wall, but said he would request that Russia prosecute Trahov under its own laws — a provision that technically exists. Under Russian law, citizens can be tried domestically for crimes committed abroad if another country provides the evidence. But legal analysts note that Russia’s willingness to prosecute one of its citizens for secretly filming consensual sex with women in Africa is, to put it mildly, not a scenario for which there is encouraging historical precedent. Russia’s own laws on non-consensual intimate recording, while formally on the books, are rarely enforced with vigor, particularly in cases involving private individuals rather than public officials.

George floated one additional option: trying Trahov in absentia under Ghanaian law. It is a legally valid path, but its practical utility is limited. A conviction in absentia produces a warrant that means Trahov cannot safely set foot in Ghana or potentially travel freely in countries honoring Interpol red notices. But it does not put him in a prison cell.

Not the First Time, Not the Last

The Trahov case is not an anomaly. It fits into a documented and disturbing pattern of foreign nationals — often from countries with weak extradition frameworks — treating parts of Africa as consequence-free zones for digital exploitation. Researchers tracking non-consensual intimate image abuse in sub-Saharan Africa have noted a surge in cases involving foreign men using subscription-based platforms, particularly Telegram and OnlyFans, to monetize footage of local women. The platforms themselves — largely incorporated offshore, subject to minimal content moderation in African jurisdictions — provide a near-perfect architecture of impunity.

The Trahov case follows, in spirit if not in identical method, a pattern already visible in South Africa, where government investigators have examined recruitment schemes exploiting women under false pretenses. Digital rights advocates in Nairobi point out that Kenya’s sparse resources for cybercrime investigations — relative to the growing volume of technology-facilitated gender-based violence — mean that even domestic perpetrators frequently escape accountability. The prospect of successfully pursuing a foreign national who has retreated behind a constitutional firewall is even more remote.

What Happens to the Women

While governments exchange diplomatic notes and investigators compile digital dossiers, the women in those videos are living with the consequences right now. Renowned Kenyan journalist Ferdinand Omondi articulated the double injury with precision: ‘The sex was consensual. The recording and distribution were not. That is sexual exploitation.’ He noted, with evident frustration, that public discourse had tilted toward blaming the women rather than condemning the violation. ‘Adults make personal choices every day, some wise, some risky. But no choice cancels the right to privacy, or grants permission to secretly record and expose someone.’

Kenya’s DCI has urged victims to present themselves at headquarters for confidential statement-taking. The Ministry of Gender has pointed women to the 1195 psychosocial support hotline. Both responses are appropriate. Neither addresses the fundamental reality: the man who made those videos is almost certainly home in Russia, untouchable, perhaps already planning his next trip.

What Accountability Might Actually Look Like

Legal experts suggest that meaningful accountability in cases like Trahov’s requires pressure on the platforms rather than — or in addition to — the perpetrator. Telegram, where Trahov allegedly hosted his subscription channel, has faced mounting criticism from governments across the world for slow responses to non-consensual content. Compelling Telegram and similar platforms to demonetize, remove content, and ban accounts associated with non-consensual intimate image abuse is achievable through domestic regulation and coordinated international pressure in ways that extraditing a Russian citizen simply is not.

Kenya also has options within its own borders: strengthening the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act to impose stiffer penalties, mandating clearer digital rights education in tourism and hospitality sectors, and pursuing regulatory action against hospitality providers — Airbnbs, hotels — that unwittingly provide the settings for such recording. The government has signaled it will engage those stakeholders. Whether that signal produces enforceable policy is a different matter.

For now, the DCI investigation continues. The warrant, should one be issued, will be issued. The Interpol red notice, if requested, will be requested. And Vyacheslav Trahov, if he is indeed back in Moscow, will remain exactly where Russia’s constitution says he must be allowed to remain: at home, free, and beyond the reach of any court in Nairobi or Accra.