In June 2025, when corruption investigators reached President Volodymyr Zelensky’s inner circle, his team responded with a systematic operation to eliminate Ukraine’s anti-corruption infrastructure.

They deployed parliamentary manipulation, information warfare through Telegram channels, and legal machinations—the full authoritarian toolkit perfected across the post-Soviet space—all to subordinate two key anti-corruption institutions to the presidentially-appointed prosecutor general through a hastily-passed law on 22 July.

The operation was sophisticated, coordinated, and executed with surgical precision. What Zelenskyy’s team didn’t anticipate was that Ukrainian society had evolved beyond their understanding.

Detailed investigations by Ukrainska Pravda and Texty.org.ua reveal how the operation unfolded—and how Ukrainian civil society and European partners forced a complete retreat that exposed post-Soviet patronage reflexes colliding with European democratic standards.

When investigators reached Zelenskyy’s actual family

By June 2025, corruption investigators had crossed a line that post-Soviet leaders consider sacred: they reached Zelenskyy’s actual inner circle.

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) charged Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov with organizing a land scheme that cost the state over $24 million.

Chernyshov wasn’t just another minister.

During Ukraine’s strict COVID lockdown in 2021, when gatherings were banned, Zelenskyy invited only a handful of intimates to celebrate his birthday. Chernyshov was the sole government official present.

Investigators were also preparing charges against Tymur Mindich, Zelenskyy’s business partner from Kvartal 95, the comedy studio where the current Ukrainian president gained his popularity—and a ticket to power. When pressure intensified, MP Yaroslav Zhelezniak reported that Mindich fled Ukraine and “will likely not return in the near future.”

As anti-corruption expert Olena Shcherban told the Kyiv Independent: “NABU and SAPO [Special Anti-Corrupution Prosecutor’s Office] have actually reached the immediate circle of the president’s ‘family.'” She predicted the Presidential Office would attack the institutions rather than abandon the minister.

She was right. When your survival network gets threatened, you protect the network.

The orchestrators revealed

Ukrainska Pravda’s investigation shows who planned the operation. The key figures were:

• Andriy Yermak (Head of Presidential Office);
• newly appointed Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko;
• and lawyer Dmytro Borzykh—a former military prosecutor positioned as the new behind-the-scenes fixer with histories of manipulating court systems.

Here’s what made the operation cynical: Kravchenko’s appointment coincided precisely with Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov fleeing abroad to avoid corruption charges. The investigation reports that Kravchenko’s final meeting with presidential leadership occurred when Chernyshov “was already abroad and not going to return.”

One law enforcement source told Ukrainska Pravda the instruction was clear: “do everything possible to destroy the influence of NABU and SAPO.” But the plan required parliamentary votes—and that’s where the real manipulation began.

The machinery of power consolidation

The operation deployed multiple tools that aspiring authoritarians use to capture institutions:

• Parliamentary manipulation: On 22 July, deputies were told they were coming to vote on an important appeal to the US Congress about recognizing Russia as a terrorist state. Many had foreign trips canceled. Only when they arrived did faction leaders reveal the “main” vote would come after—a “marker” vote that was “principled for the president.” As one MP told Ukrainska Pravda: “People really had no idea what they would vote for. They said, ‘Why do you need the text?! Vote, it’s important.'” Parliament had roughly one hour to review amendments that fundamentally transformed corruption oversight.
• Buying loyalty through legal deals: MP Robert Horvat from the “Dovira” group had reached a plea agreement with SAPO in his land theft case. But after Kravchenko’s appointment, he refused to sign, telling prosecutors “Klymenko [head of SAPO] will soon be sacked.” Horvat voted both for the anti-corruption law and for Kravchenko’s appointment, along with nine colleagues from his group.
• Manufactured security crisis: On 21 July, SBU conducted 70 searches targeting 15 NABU employees, claiming Russian infiltration. The star villain was Ruslan Magamedrasulov, accused of selling hemp to Dagestan and contacting “FSB agents.” The timing was theatrical—exactly one day before the crucial vote. NABU noted most searches concerned traffic accidents, but Telegram channels immediately called NABU a “branch of the FSB” and photoshopped Russian flags onto its logo.
• Civil society intimidation: Parallel raids targeted anti-corruption activist Vitaliy Shabunin in the run-up to the law. The message was clear: supporting independent oversight brings consequences.
• Information warfare through Telegram: Texty.org.ua’s investigation tracked 246 coordinated posts across 24 popular channels from 5 June to 23 July, revealing a sophisticated influence operation that weaponized Ukraine’s most powerful information medium.

The comedy studio’s systematic capture

This wasn’t just about protecting two friends. After Zelenskyy’s 2019 victory, over 30 former Kvartal 95 employees moved into government positions—what Ukrainian analysts call a “comedy studio government.”

Take Chernyshov himself. In December 2024, Ukraine created the Ministry of National Unity specifically to give him a prominent role.

The new ministry’s purpose remained deliberately vague—supposedly engaging with Ukrainian diaspora abroad, but critics noted this duplicated existing Foreign Ministry functions. Even some ruling party deputies refused to endorse Chernyshov’s nomination due to “lack of clarity regarding the ministry’s purpose.”

Seven months later, after Chernyshov’s corruption charges, the ministry was quietly merged with the Ministry of Social Policy—effectively eliminating it. A ministry created for one man, disbanded when that man became a liability.

But Chernyshov wasn’t appointed for competence—he was appointed for loyalty. He belonged to Zelensky’s intimate circle, invited to birthday celebrations during wartime restrictions. When you staff government based on personal relationships rather than merit, you create a state that can’t tolerate oversight.

The cynical gamble on European integration

What makes the July operation particularly cynical is the timing. European Pravda reveals that Brussels had secretly scheduled 18 July to open Ukraine’s first EU negotiating cluster, bypassing Hungarian obstruction entirely. Zelenskyy knew about these plans—he’d been personally involved in discussions with Danish officials since late June.

But instead of supporting this diplomatic breakthrough, Ukraine systematically undermined its reform credentials. The EU response was swift: Brussels froze $5.5 billion in aid programs, including loans backed by frozen Russian assets. As one European official noted: “Ukraine has done the dirty work instead of Viktor Orbán.”

Explore further

The EU is withholding billions from Ukraine and honestly, it’s kinda fair

The Soviet shadow: why personal loyalty trumps law

What happened next follows patterns that Cambridge academic Alena Ledeneva spent decades documenting in post-Soviet informal networks.

During the Soviet era, personal networks weren’t just convenient—they were survival tools. Ledeneva’s research on blat (the Soviet system of personal favors) shows how people learned to rely on informal connections because formal institutions were instruments of arbitrary repression.

When the law serves power rather than justice, personal loyalty becomes rational defense.

But the cruel irony is that this survival strategy becomes democratic poison when institutions actually start working. What protected people under totalitarianism destroys accountability under democracy.

Zelensky’s response perfectly illustrates this post-Soviet reflex. Instead of accepting that even his inner circle must follow the law, his team moved to eliminate the institutions enforcing accountability.

The mentality that personal loyalty creates immunity from prosecution—that being part of the president’s “family” places you above the law—represents exactly the thinking that helped people survive Soviet totalitarianism.

Ukraine had seen this before. Viktor Yanukovych, the fugitive pro-Russian authoritarian president used identical methods during his presidency.

His prosecutor general Viktor Pshonka called himself “a member of President Viktor Yanukovych’s team” and led the crackdown on protesters against the torpedoing of EU integration in 2013-2014, abusing state power to keep Yanukovych in power. His office pursued the politically motivated prosecution of Yulia Tymoshenko, charging her with abuse of power for a 2009 gas contract.

Both men fled to Russia during the 2014 Euromaidan Revolution.

When civil society said no

Ukrainian democracy had evolved since Yanukovych’s time in ways that proved deeper than anyone expected. Mass demonstrations erupted within hours—the largest protests since Russia’s invasion. Instead of riot police (“cosmonauts” in Ukrainian slang), authorities deployed “police of dialogue.” The contrast with Yanukovych’s Berkut units couldn’t have been starker.

Perhaps most telling was the demographic: teenagers and young adults leading chants and organizing through social media.

Ukraine’s response followed patterns that political scientists Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel documented in their World Values Survey research: successful democratic transitions correspond with societies shifting from “survival values” (emphasizing economic security and low tolerance) to “self-expression values” (prioritizing individual freedom, tolerance, and political participation).

When Zelensky’s team tried to preserve Soviet-style “family immunity,” Ukrainians chose institutional accountability over patronage protection.

European pressure reinforced Ukrainian resistance. On 31 July, parliament voted 331-0 to restore anti-corruption agency independence.

Explore further

They came. They cussed. They won.

The test and the warning

This was Ukraine’s first major test of whether it had outgrown the post-Soviet patronage trap. Zelensky’s team tried to replicate the loyalty-first system that had dominated Ukrainian politics for decades. When independent institutions threatened their inner circle, they deployed the full authoritarian toolkit.

However, Ukrainian civil society matured during three decades of independence and intensified during three years of war. When citizens recognized the Yanukovych pattern, they defended democratic accountability.

The victory comes with warnings. The machinery for institutional capture remains in place. Just weeks after the crisis, Zelenskyy appointed Yuliia Svyrydenko as Prime Minister—widely viewed as closely aligned with Yermak. As former President Petro Poroshenko noted: “Replacing Shmyhal, who was ‘Yermak in a shirt,’ with Svyrydenko, who will be ‘Yermak in a skirt,’ changes nothing.”

It is telling that in her first major western interview, which ran on the same day as the Rada gutted NABU and SAPO, Svyrydenko played down Ukrainian corruption, alleging that the problem is overstated. The pool of anonymous pro-Zelenskyy Telegram channels pushed this quote extensively while protests flooded four cities.

More substantially, her government has refused to appoint Oleksandr Tsyvinsky as head of the Bureau of Economic Security, despite his selection by an independent commission and backing from the IMF. The refusal continues the same pattern of blocking oversight appointments that triggered the July crisis.

Most concerning, the team that orchestrated this operation—Yermak, Kravchenko, and their networks—remain in position. They’ve learned from this failure and may attempt more subtle approaches next time.

A bitter irony is involved. Zelenskyy built his political career playing a fictional president fighting corrupt officials in his TV show “Servant of the People.” Six years into real power, when investigators reached his actual inner circle—not fictional corrupt officials but his birthday party guests and business partners—he chose loyalty over law. This is precisely why independent oversight exists: power corrupts even those who start as anti-corruption outsiders.

The comedy studio presidency may still view independent oversight as existential threat. But Ukrainian civil society has shown it’s stronger than the survival networks trying to capture it. That’s the foundation democracies are built on.

An earlier version of this article mistakenly said that Svyrydenko’s only comment on the crisis was the corruption in Ukraine is overstated

Germany has called for continued anti-corruption reforms following Ukraine’s parliament approval of law №13533, designed to restore independence to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO).

The German Foreign Ministry described the parliamentary vote as “a positive and necessary step on the path to restoring lost trust.” However, Berlin emphasized that more work remains ahead.

“Now it is necessary to continue reforms in the sphere of fighting corruption,” the German Foreign Ministry reported.

On 31 July, Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada (Ukraine’s Parliament) supported the presidential bill №13533 on restoring the independence of NABU and SAPO. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy signed the document shortly after its parliamentary passage.

The move represents a reversal from events, when on the evening of 22 July Zelenskyy signed a law that limited the independence of the anti-corruption institutions NABU and SAPO.

That decision prompted thousands of people to participate in protest rallies in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities.

Western politicians also pressured Ukraine to strengthen its institutional framework for combating corruption, particularly as the country continues to receive substantial Western financial and military support.

Following the approved law which reportedly restores the independence of anti-corruption agencies, the European Union has confirmed it has no plans to freeze funding for Ukraine, addressing speculation about potential financial consequences tied to the anti-corruption legislation.

Ukraine’s Parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, voted to restore the independence of its main anti-corruption bodies — the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) — by passing presidential draft law No. 13533.

The bill passed with 331 votes and was immediately signed in the chamber by Speaker Ruslan Stefanchuk and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

For a week leading up to the vote, thousands of Ukrainians across Kyiv, Lviv, Dnipro and Odesa took to the streets — demanding the reversal of controversial changes even under martial law restrictions on public gatherings. It became the largest wave of protests since Russia’s full‑scale invasion.

Although the effectiveness of these anti-corruption bodies has often been questioned, the earlier law that weakened them was widely condemned at home and abroad as authoritarian and unacceptable, concentrating power in the President’s Office and threatening Ukraine’s reform commitments.

“This is a guarantee of the proper independent functioning of our state’s anti-corruption bodies and all law enforcement agencies. This is the right decision,” Zelenskyy wrote on Telegram.

Mass protests force a U-turn

The debate in the chamber was heated, with shouting, accusations, and visible anger.

MPs insisted that the Speaker and President sign the new law immediately, without delay, to quickly cancel the controversial changes adopted a week earlier.

Outside Parliament, in Mariinskyi Park, protesters gathered to listen to the live broadcast of the vote. When the result was announced, they cheered and shouted: “Power belongs to the people!”

Despite martial law restrictions on public gatherings, police did not disperse the rallies that took place in several Ukrainian cities, and the authorities seemed unprepared for such large‑scale resistance to the new law.

For the first time since the start of Russia’s full‑scale invasion, the session of the Verkhovna Rada was broadcast live on the Rada TV channel — a move widely seen as a concession to public pressure and a demand for transparency.

International pressure grows

After the vote, European Commission spokesperson Guillaume Mercier confirmed that the EU has no plans to freeze financial aid for Ukraine.

EU Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos welcomed the move but noted on X:

“Today’s law restores key safeguards, but challenges remain. The EU supports the Ukrainian citizens’ demands for reform.”

Brussels emphasized that Ukraine must continue to strengthen reforms as part of its EU accession process.

What triggered the crisis

In July, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) arrested a NABU detective on charges of spying for Russia, alleging that classified information had been passed to Russian intelligence. Critics said these arrests were used as a pretext to attack and weaken independent anti-corruption agencies.

Anti‑corruption activists further accused President Zelenskyy of retaliating against NABU and SAPO because they had investigated figures close to him, including former Deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Chernyshov and businessman Timur Mindich, a long‑time associate and former partner in Zelenskyy’s media company Kvartal 95.

Soon after, on 22 July, Parliament passed law No. 12414, originally about missing persons. At the last minute, MPs added amendments that made NABU and SAPO dependent on the Prosecutor General, granting that office the power to seize cases, close investigations, and weaken the agencies’ independence.

The move provoked protests and drew sharp criticism from the US and EU. Despite the backlash, Zelenskyy signed the law the same day.

Reversal under pressure

A week later, under public pressure, threats to cut foreign funding, and continuing protests, Zelenskyy introduced draft law No. 13533, restoring NABU and SAPO’s full powers.

The bill was fast-tracked and adopted in full on 31 July.

Harsh words in Parliament

Before the vote, former Speaker Dmytro Razumkov criticized his colleagues:

“Aren’t you tired of eating excrement in this chamber and feeding it to people??!”

Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze of the opposition party European Solidarity said Parliament is “run like a collective farm from the President’s Office.”

Yulia Tymoshenko, leader of Batkivshchyna, opposed the bill and claimed Ukraine is under “external control.” Meanwhile, Dmytro Kostiuk, a member of the presidential party Servant of the People, announced he was leaving the faction because of the previous controversial vote.

Other members of Zelenskyy’s Servant of the People party admitted mistakes and even held up protest-style posters inside the chamber.

The episode also highlighted the growing centralization of power in the President’s Office in Kyiv. With elections suspended due to the war with Russia, Parliament is widely seen as following instructions from the presidential administration rather than acting as an independent branch of government.

What the new law changes

The new law cancels the 22 July amendments and returns NABU and SAPO to full independence.
It adds one condition: NABU staff with access to state secrets must pass a polygraph, carried out by NABU’s own internal control unit rather than the SBU.

According to NABU, more than 200 such tests were already conducted in 2024. NABU and SAPO said they took part in drafting the new law, are satisfied with its provisions, and strongly supported its swift adoption.

Criticism of NABU and SAPO

Ukraine’s anti‑corruption system includes NABU, SAPO, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) and the High Anti‑Corruption Court (HACC).

Despite significant funding and Western support, their effectiveness remains debated. Critics point out that these bodies are costly, operate in a grey constitutional area, lack independent audits, and have brought few senior officials to justice in almost ten years.

Supporters argue that these problems cannot be solved by a single, quickly adopted law, but require long‑term reforms, stronger oversight and real political independence.

The creation of these institutions was one of the EU’s key conditions for granting Ukraine a visa‑free regime and a requirement for Western financial aid. Western partners helped launch and fund them after concluding that Ukraine’s “old” police and prosecution services had failed to eradicate top‑level corruption.

RFE/RL reports that the luxury life of customs official has triggered protests after an investigation revealed villas, cars and expensive foreign schooling that far exceed his declared income. The Schemes investigative unit of RFE/RL examined the finances of 44-year-old Anatolii Komar, head of the Ukrainian Customs Service department that manages duties on energy imports and exports.

Luxury life of customs official draws anger

RFE/RL says Komar’s family has access to luxury real estate, elite foreign education and high-end cars while his official monthly income is about $2,000. His wife Maria declares about $8,000 per month as a tour guide and online course provider, but this sum still cannot cover the expenses shown.

Social media posts reveal their daughter graduating in 2023 from the Pascal English School in Nicosia, Cyprus, with fees close to $30,000 per year. Other posts show her traveling to Venice, Montreux, Dublin and Albania. This year, she appears to be enrolled at King’s College London, where tuition for non-UK students is nearly $35,000 annually.

Mansion near Kyiv and cash from relatives

According to the report, the family does not live in the Kyiv apartment officially registered to Komar in 2021. Instead, they live in an apartment bought by Maria’s father, Serhii Hladkov. Hladkov also built a 450-square-meter house with a pool and staff quarters in February 2025 in the village of Vyshenky near Kyiv. Experts interviewed by RFE/RL valued the property at more than $1 million.

Hladkov and his wife, Lidia, both retired from modestly paid state jobs, later declared self-employment earnings of about $400,000 and $180,000 respectively. Despite this, they have purchased several properties and gifted almost $120,000 to the family. Hladkov told RFE/RL that he had earned the money and then ended the conversation.

The luxury Mercedes and a “wealthy godfather”

Komar has been driving a Mercedes S-class since 2021. He told RFE/RL that the car is rented by his wife and refused to disclose the price. RFE/RL reports that rental companies estimate the cost at $6,000 per month. The vehicle is registered to the Primorskiy Energy Generating Company, which declared only about $14,000 in three years of car rental income, a figure far below market value. The company’s director, Roman Vorobel, refused to answer detailed questions and said he would consult a lawyer.

Conflict of interest questions over VM Groupe

RFE/RL also found that Komar is president of an amateur soccer club in his hometown of Rokyta. The team is sponsored by VM Groupe, an importer of petroleum products that is under investigation by law enforcement for large-scale tax evasion and by the SBU for importing Russian raw materials.

Ukraine faces a potential funding shortfall of $10-15 billion next year as the country struggles to meet reform commitments demanded by international lenders while maintaining intensive defense spending, according to a Reuters analysis.

The government currently directs most state revenues toward military operations, relying on foreign aid totaling $139 billion since Russia’s February 2022 invasion to cover social and humanitarian expenses, state data shows.

Central Bank Governor Andriy Pyshnyi revealed that only one-third of the $65 billion required for 2026-2027 has been secured, with negotiations continuing for the remainder. A survey of eight economists by the Centre for Economic Studies in Kyiv indicates Ukraine will need between $39 billion and $58 billion in external financing for 2025 alone.

“A key challenge for the government now is to look for $10-15 billion in addition to that volume of aid which partners have already pledged for 2026,” ICU investment house stated in a research note, according to Reuters.

The funding gap has widened after Ukraine missed several reform targets agreed with lenders, including judicial appointments and anti-corruption leadership positions. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s decision to tighten control over the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office sparked the largest wartime street protests and drew sharp criticism from European allies.

Zelenskyy subsequently reversed course, submitting new legislation to parliament to restore institutional independence. The draft bill was scheduled for a vote on 31 July.

The parliamentary committee on law enforcement unanimously supported President Zelenskyy’s draft law №13533 on restoring the powers of the National Anti-corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), according to MP Yaroslav Zheleznyak.

The committee approved the document without any amendments to the originally registered text, Zheleznyak said. The draft law received 19 votes in favor, with no opposition or abstentions recorded.

“Tomorrow (July 31 — ed.) this decision will be put to a vote in the Rada hall. Immediately in two readings. Everything will be fine — there are more than enough votes,” Zheleznyak said.

The move represents a reversal from events, when on the evening of 22 July Zelenskyy signed a law that limited the independence of the anti-corruption institutions NABU and SAPO.

That decision prompted thousands of people to participate in protest rallies in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities. Protesters chanted: “Veto the law,” “Return Europe,” and “Shame.”

Responding to the protests, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced plans to submit a draft law to the Verkhovna Rada that will restore independence to NABU and SAPO. Zelenskyy said that the text of the draft law “guarantees real strengthening of the law enforcement system in Ukraine, independence of anti-corruption bodies, as well as reliable protection of the law enforcement system from any Russian influence or interference.”

According to the document published on the Rada’s website, the subordination of the Specialized Anti-corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) to the Prosecutor General will be abolished. Other provisions include limiting the Prosecutor General’s influence on NABU, institutional independence of SAPO, and simplified procedures for appointing prosecutors.

On 30 July, MPs submitted two additional alternative draft laws concerning NABU and SAPO. The total number of alternative documents has now increased to six.

When Ukrainian Gen Z hit the streets to defend anti-corruption agencies, they turned protest signs into an art form. Armed with cardboard, markers, and three years of war-induced gray hair, they created what might be the most literate protest movement in recent memory.

These weren’t your typical angry slogans. Protesters quoted Taras Shevchenko alongside modern poets, mixed classical Ukrainian literature with creative profanity, and crafted messages that read like Twitter threads gone beautifully offline. “Do cattle low when NABU is whole?” riffed on 19th-century novels. “Nations don’t die of heart attacks—first their NABU and SAPO are taken away” played with national poetry. And yes, plenty of signs just said “fuck” in various creative arrangements.

Political experts later explained why the profanity worked so well: it desacralizes power and connects educated protesters with ordinary voters. Basically, when you tell authorities “you’re wrong,” you stay polite. When you say “you’ve lost your fucking minds,” you’re questioning whether they deserve power at all. Guess which one scares politicians more.

The result? President Zelenskyy backed down in 72 hours. Turns out democracy responds better to cardboard signs and literary references than most people expected.

Law 12414 would have transferred control of Ukraine’s main anti-corruption bodies—NABU and SAPO—to a presidentially-appointed prosecutor general. These agencies were created after the 2014 Revolution of Dignity as independent watchdogs. For protesters, many of whom had relatives who died creating these institutions, the law felt like betrayal from within.

After three days of protests, Zelenskyy announced he would submit new legislation preserving the agencies’ independence. Sometimes the pen—or marker—really is mightier than the sword.

More about the Gen Z that nobody expected

They came. They cussed. They won.

Confused about the law? We’ve got you:

Explained: why Ukraine nuked its own anti-corruption agencies

“Fucked up reformers!” screamed the sign of 18-year-old Polina, the girl with the green hair. Her companion’s metaphorically shouted “CUNTS” in huge green letters. Teenage profanity filled every corner of the first large wartime protests engulfing Ukraine’s capital.

It could have been any Gen Z rebellion against the system. And in a way, it was—against a system where President Zelenskyy gutted Ukraine’s anti-corruption bodies over just 72 hours. Except it was also a protest for a system—the one Ukraine dreamed up during the Euromaidan revolution in 2014.

“I don’t give a fuck,” Polina snapped back at criticism over the protests’ expletive language. “Swearing allows you to express an opinion and is part of the freedom of speech. Get it?”

Prudes on Facebook scolded protesters like her: it was beneath Ukrainian national dignity to devolve to such unholy vocabulary.

Yet there she was, a first-year student of Ukraine’s top university, one uncle killed during the 2014 protests where Ukrainians rebelled against a pro-Russian president’s U-turn on EU integration, and another uncle killed fighting the Russian invasion, unapologetically demanding political accountability from Ukraine’s current president.

“We know our history, we know why this happened. We are fighting for our freedom from Russia. We are against Ukraine turning into Russia from the inside. So, NABU should be an independent institution,” she said, holding her expletive sign.

Polina encapsulated the main demand of the protests—that a law to bring Ukraine’s anti-graft agencies under the control of a presidentially appointed prosecutor is repealed.

Tens of thousands of people like Polina, holding a sea of cardboard signs, may have just saved Ukraine’s democracy.

The 20-somethings who organized a revolution in 24 hours

Twenty-three-year-old Zinaida Averina never expected to become the architect of Ukraine’s first wartime democratic uprising. When parliament rushed through legislation gutting anti-corruption agencies on 22 July, she created a Telegram chat for protesters that exploded to over 2,000 people within hours.

The chat became a masterclass in grassroots democracy. Participants debated protest demands, coordinated with police, organized snacks and water stations, and—uniquely for a political movement—created separate threads for memes and hookups. “What could be sexier than a clear civic position?” joked one organizer. “We need to solve the demographic crisis!”

Many signs cheekily declared “This cardboard is paid for”—a stab at conspiracy theories claiming Western funding behind the protests’ eruption.

But the most remarkable thing happened on the streets. “Two very young people, eyes shining with excitement, look at the crowd,” witnessed Anton Senenko. “Katia, this is our first Maidan!” one exclaimed, invoking Kyiv’s Independence Square, Maidan Nezalezhnosti, where all the revolutions happen.

They kissed.

Not exactly your typical protest energy. But then again, this wasn’t your typical protest.

Explore further

“I defended Zelenskyy against Trump’s dictatorship accusations. Now I can’t,” says Ukraine’s top corruption fighter

Why swearing terrified the authorities more than anything

Critics fixated on the protesters’ colorful language, missing why it was so politically effective. Oleksandr Rachev explained the strategy behind the swearing.

“When you tell authorities ‘you’re wrong,’ you stay within a model of respect that doesn’t frighten them,” he noted. “When you say ‘you’ve lost your fucking minds,’ it means questioning their very legitimacy. And that scares them.”

The profanity served another function: mass appeal. “Swearing is considered the language of ‘ordinary people,'” Ravchev continued. “University professors and activists don’t swear—that’s why they stay in their intellectual bubble. Swearing is a bridge between creative youth protesting and ordinary voters who actually vote.”

The slogan “I need a system that works for me” would be fine for intellectuals, he argued. But “Why the fuck do I need a system that works against me?” reaches ordinary people’s minds. “Because that’s exactly how they talk.”

Behind those Facebook posts scolding protesters about “pure language,” Ravchev detected real fear: “The authorities are terrified that profane protest slogans will reach mass voters and sweep them away.”

Academic Volodymyr Kulyk found himself shouting “The Office fucked up” despite never swearing in front of his wife in 35 years. The moment surprised him—but he understood what was happening.

The youth had “finally desacralized power, which can now be addressed without picking words, at least when it deserves it,” he wrote. When even a polite academic starts cursing at the government, something fundamental has shifted.

The war’s children have gray hair

But there was a deeper reason behind the raw language. These weren’t typical teenagers. Tetiana Troshchynska noted: “My hairdresser tells me about all the gray children she gives haircuts to. 12, 13, 16 years old. Half-gray heads, gray streaks, peppered gray. I tell some, not others, because they’re sad and crying. I don’t know where they’re from, what they’ve experienced, who they’ve lost.”

The Kapranov Brothers added: “Swearing is a consequence of war, exactly like ruins, minefields and trenches. Just as we’ll have to demine forests and seas from Russian mines after the war, we’ll have to demine heads from swearing. But—after the war.”

These weren’t kids who idealized the two anti-corruption agencies, NABU (National Anti-Corruption Bureau) and SAPO (Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office). Most protesters readily admitted both agencies had problems—corruption scandals, slow investigations, bureaucratic failures.

“They’re trying to get rid of essentially the only anti-corruption mechanism that Ukraine has,” Marco, a 25-year-old who lived in Chicago for a decade before returning to Kyiv, explained to Euromaidan Press.

“By doing that, they’re trying to integrate it into the actual government, which makes it so the people in government who are corrupt decide whether they themselves are corrupt, right? So, it’s a little counterintuitive.”

NABU and SAPO, whatever their flaws, were the first real separation of power in Ukraine—bringing it closer to a functioning democracy and further from the likes of the autocracies in Russia and Belarus.

More in our editorial

Editorial: Zelenskyy opens a second front—against his own people

The twitter-space goes offline

But focusing on the swearing missed the real cultural phenomenon. Most signs weren’t profane—they were poetic.

Ukrainian cultural observer Olena Oleksandra Chervonik noted that these cardboard creations represented “real poetry, with all its nerve and broken form. Something in the tradition of Ukrainian futurists—short, with broken lines, unconventional syllable division.”

Signs mixed Latin script with Cyrillic, quoted Taras Shevchenko alongside modern poets, featured portraits of Lesya Ukrainka next to Zelensky caricatures.

“If you want to know where modern poetry is in Ukraine—here it is, on these cardboards,” one literary critic observed. “Poetry as a weapon is something very Ukrainian.”

This was Ukraine’s first Twitter-era protest movement; the cardboard sea of short, punchy statements was tweets gone offline.

Yet paradoxically, it produced some of the most sophisticated political poetry seen on Ukrainian streets:

• “Do cattle low when NABU is whole?”—parodying a 19th-century Ukrainian novel by Panás Myrnyi, which basically says that cattle (people) don’t complain when they’re well-fed;
• “Nations don’t die of heart attacks—first they lose their NABU and SAPO”—riffing on modern poetess Lina Kostenko, “Nations don’t die of heart attacks—first they lose their speech”;
• or the blunt “Why the fuck do I need a system that works against me?”

The unspoken wartime contract, broken

The protests revealed something deeper than anger over specific legislation. As wounded veteran and protester Sabir explained: “We had an unspoken social contract: we don’t criticize the authorities during war, but they don’t pull any bullshit. But they kept pulling bullshit. Now they decided they could allow themselves more. People showed they couldn’t.”

The speed of the legislation shocked even seasoned political observers. Bills typically languish in parliament for months. This one passed in hours, with Zelensky signing it the same evening as protests erupted outside his office.

“When you pass such a law in one evening, it looks very much like fear of losing power,” said IT worker Olena Danyliuk, 31. “They’re trembling at the thought they might have to give up power.”

EU officials were reportedly shocked when they learned of the legislation. Brussels had planned to secretly fast-track Ukraine’s accession talks, but the anti-corruption law threatened that timeline.

Perhaps Ukraine was following Georgia’s trajectory—offering high hopes but ultimately succumbing to pro-Russian authoritarianism?

Not so fast, said the youngsters with their “silly” signs.

Explore further

EU had a secret plan to bypass Orbán. Zelenskyy blew it up instead.

When Gen Z rebellion goes right

The contrast with Western youth movements couldn’t be more vivid. While American and European teenagers often target democratic institutions themselves—demanding to tear down systems they see as irredeemably corrupt—Ukrainian Gen Z fight to preserve and strengthen democratic institutions against authoritarian capture.

This difference reveals an ironic truth: Western youth don’t know how good they have it. They’ve never lived without independent courts, free press, or anti-corruption agencies. They can afford to attack these institutions because they’ve never experienced their absence.

Ukrainian twenty-somethings have gray hair at 16 and dead relatives in their family trees. They know exactly what happens when democratic institutions disappear. They are, actually, dying for a stab at a democratic future, not the one that Russia offers—where opposition figures end up dead or imprisoned, where corruption flows unchecked because there’s no independent oversight.

As veteran protester Ivan Chyhyryn, who lost his leg rescuing a wounded comrade, told reporters: “My parents were on Maidan in 2014 when I was very young. Creating independent anti-corruption institutions was one of their goals. What my parents fought for is now being thrown away.”

His generation inherited revolution in their DNA—the Orange Revolution in 2004, the Revolution of Dignity in 2014, and now resistance to democratic backsliding in 2025. But unlike previous generations who had to build democracy from scratch, these youth were defending institutions they’d grown up with.

The cardboard revolution’s victory?

By Wednesday evening, Zelensky announced he would submit new legislation preserving anti-corruption agencies’ independence. “We heard the street,” he said—the same president who’d ignored international criticism and parliamentary opposition.

And this illustrated the main difference between Ukraine and Russia: Russian opposition complains it can’t change anything while Ukrainian teenagers flood the streets with “Fuck corruption” signs and win.

“I genuinely believe that if this happened in Russia, police would have just come in and beat everybody up,” Marco told Euromaidan Press. “In Ukraine, though, we really are freedom-loving and we will show the government that we are the ones in charge, not them.”

Even Russian independent media called these protests a “political crisis.” For Russians, street demonstrations represent a system breakdown. For Ukrainians, they represent the system working—checks and balances moving from the streets into the political fabric.

As protester Polina put it: “Only we can fight for our best future. That’s why we’re all here.”

Not bad for a generation whose main political tools are Twitter, Telegram, and magic markers.

Explore further

Explained: why Ukraine nuked its own anti-corruption agencies

After a law limiting the independence of anti-corruption bodies came into effect, one of them, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau or NABU, announced the completion of investigations of long-term cases. Four high-profile criminal cases were closed in one week by the agency, Glavkom reports.

This surge in anti-corruption activity coincided with a public statement by the new Prosecutor General, Ruslan Kravchenko, about his intention to intervene in certain cases that NABU had been investigating for years.

“In such cases, I will raise questions and possibly create a joint investigative group with other employees,” said Kravchenko.

For comparison: in January 2025, NABU did not report about the number of cases brought to a conclusion. According to the Center for Countering Corruption, the agency completed one in May and three in March, Texty reported. 

Billion-dollar fraud at PrivatBank

Finally, NABU completed the investigation of one of the largest cases involving the embezzlement of over $225 million from PrivatBank before its nationalization. According to the investigation, the money was funneled through a scheme of fictitious loans registered to controlled entities.

The case involves six suspects, including oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky, who has been in custody since 2023.

Undeclared assets of AMCU head

Pavlo Kyrylenko, head of the Antimonopoly Committee, is charged with failing to declare significant property, including several apartments in Kyiv and Uzhhorod, a residential house of over 220 sq.m. near Kyiv, two land plots, two garage boxes, six parking spaces, three non-residential premises totaling over 190 sq.m., and a BMW X3 car. Additionally, a separate case regarding Kyrylenko’s alleged illegal enrichment amounting to over $1.75 million is under review and has already been transferred to the High Anti-Corruption Court.

Fictitious rulings for draft dodgers in Odesa Oblast

Regional judges systematically issued fake rulings allowing men to avoid mobilization. The most common reason was the status of “sole parent.” According to the investigation, $3,500 was charged for such rulings. A total of 1,040 similar rulings were issued over the past year.

$300,000 for impunity

Another case was completed, and this time against an SBU officer who, according to the investigation, demanded $300,000 for destroying materials related to the illegal smuggling of men abroad. If refused, he threatened to initiate criminal prosecution under more serious charges.

Ukraine will receive only part of the fourth tranche of financial assistance under the Ukraine Facility mechanism. The reason is the failure to implement three out of sixteen key reforms stipulated in agreements with the EU, says Guillaume Mercier, European Commission spokesperson, European Pravda reports. 

If Kyiv had implemented all 16 reforms, Ukraine would have received €4.5 billion. But according to Mercier, the European Commission assessed only 13 indicators as fulfilled, and therefore proposes a reduced tranche of €3.05 billion.

Which reforms were not implemented?

The three reforms that remain unfulfilled are:

• decentralization
• reform of ARMA (Asset Recovery and Management Agency),
• transparent selection of judges for the High Anti-Corruption Court.

Ukraine submitted a request to the EU for a partial payment back in June 2025.

The Ukraine Facility program envisions providing Ukraine with up to €50 billion over several years, conditional on the successful implementation of reforms. Each tranche is tied to specific steps. 

Masked men appeared at anti-corruption demonstrations in Kyiv Thursday evening, carrying inflammatory signs targeting President Volodymyr Zelenskyy personally—exactly 24 hours after Ukrainian intelligence warned that Russia would deploy provocateurs to exploit the crisis.

The timing wasn’t coincidental. Defense Intelligence had warned Wednesday that “Kremlin agents are actively studying the internal situation” to weaponize protests against the law that subordinates Ukraine’s anti-corruption bodies to the Prosecutor General’s Office.

When the real protesters left, others appeared

The incident unfolded around evening as legitimate demonstrators wrapped up their third day of protests against Law No. 12414. What happened next looked like textbook destabilization.

Masked individuals emerged with signs reading “Ukraine is not Kvartal! Ukrainians are not slaves!” “Killers of democracy traitors of Ukraine,” and “Heroes are dying for Ukraine and these two are destroying it!”—directly targeting Zelenskyy and his chief of staff Andriy Yermak, according to footage captured by a Euromaidan Press correspondent.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Euromaidan Press (@euromaidanpress)

Legitimate protesters had focused on defending institutions: “Hands off NABU and SAP!” and “The lost generation wants democracy.” These newcomers turned it into a vitriolic attack on the country’s leadership.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Euromaidan Press (@euromaidanpress)

The power concentration driving protest anger

Why target Zelenskyy and Yermak specifically? The anti-corruption law represents broader concerns about power centralization during wartime.

When investigators began targeting Zelenskyy’s closest associates—including Oleksiy Chernyshov, the only Cabinet minister invited to Zelenskyy’s COVID birthday party, and business partner Tymur Mindych from Kvartal 95—the response was to subordinate the investigators rather than allow the process to continue.

The law effectively places NABU and SAPO under the Prosecutor General’s control, ending a decade of institutional independence. The protesters aren’t calling for Zelenskyy’s removal—they want the law repealed while maintaining effective war leadership. Most Ukrainians still oppose holding elections while fighting Russia. Their primary concern remains winning the war.

That’s precisely what makes this moment valuable to Moscow. The Kremlin hopes to exploit these real institutional tensions to destabilize Zelenskyy’s government entirely.

Explore further

Explained: why Ukraine nuked its own anti-corruption agencies

Surgical timing raises questions

Witness Mladena Kachurets documented the evening’s events. The suspicious activity began about 10 minutes before an air raid alert—perfect timing for dramatic effect.

“Masked individuals gathered the remaining protesters around them and delivered some kind of recorded speech,” she wrote. Multiple distractions played out simultaneously. While media focused on MP Maryana Bezuhla giving comments, “behind her was a verbal altercation between two young men, drawing part of the attention away.”

Then came the crescendo. When the air raid alert sounded, “the masked individuals demonstratively lit flares—an impressive picture, you’ll agree.”

Classic Russian influence operation

The provocateurs’ work didn’t end with the flares. Multiple Russian media outlets, starting from TASS, quickly fabricated coverage, with headlines like “Protesters in Kyiv called Zelenskyy and Yermak ‘traitors of Ukraine'” appearing the next day.

“They unfurled posters with images of Zelenskyy and Yermak, accompanied by inscriptions: ‘Killers of democracy – traitors of Ukraine’ and ‘Dictators.’ The posters also indicated that ‘these two’ are destroying the country, and ‘Ukrainians are not slaves,’” TASS reported on the provocateurs.

They cited Strana.ua, a pro-Russian media outlet that Ukraine sanctioned in 2021, as their source without providing actual links to any such article. Strana indeed reported on the event, on their Telegram channel, using a video by UNIAN with a comment presenting this as legitimate sentiments of the protesters.

The catch is that Ukrainian media, sensing Russian hybrid warfare operations from a mile away, either did not report on the men or reported them as provocateurs. Even the opposition 5 Kanal tweeted the video with a comment “provocative action” and followed up with a comment from the organizers that dismissed the burned Yermak and Zelenskyy portraits as a “provocation.”

The UNIAN video that Strana.ua shared the video with this comment: “At a protest in Kyiv, a group of planted provocateurs are lighting flares to the sound of air raid sirens. It looks like these uninvited guests are clearly and openly staging a photo op. Makes you wonder who needs this footage besides Russian propaganda—and who’s pulling the strings?”

What unraveled in the backyard of the President’s Office in Kyiv on 24 July was a classic Russian influence operation. Its aim was to fabricate a virtual reality inside the heads of Russians to validate the propaganda narratives driving Russia’s war—that Ukrainians want this, because they don’t support Zelenskyy anyway.

The inflammatory signs calling Zelenskyy a “dictator” and “traitor” now circulate in Russian information space—manufacturing evidence that Ukraine is fragmenting internally to validate Moscow’s narrative that its invasion “liberates” Ukrainians from their government.

We’ve seen multiple examples of how these operations work in the Surkov Leaks, a collection of Vladimir Putin’s gray cardinal Vladislav Surkov, who worked to destabilize Ukraine from within after the Euromaidan revolution with hybrid warfare means. So far, it appears that the operation has influenced solely Russians, as the incendiary narrative of “down with the dictators” proved too radical for Ukrainians.

But that doesn’t mean that the Kremlin won’t keep trying and finding other ways to mess with the minds of Ukrainians—and anybody else gullible enough to fall for the Kremlin’s information warfare.

Explore further

What Surkov’s hacked emails tell about Russia’s hybrid war against Ukraine

What happens next?

But here’s what actually happened to the supposed “dictator”: within three days of signing the controversial law, Zelenskyy submitted corrective legislation under intense public pressure.

“We heard the street,” he admitted, promising new legislation to restore anti-corruption agency independence. Parliament has scheduled July 31 to vote on the bill—though passage isn’t guaranteed.

Protesters haven’t declared victory yet. They’ve vowed to keep demonstrating until the corrective law actually passes and institutional independence is genuinely restored. The danger to democratic institutions was real, and vigilance remains essential.

But that’s precisely the point. The provocateur operation aimed to show Russians that Ukrainians reject their leadership and welcome “liberation.” Instead, it captured something different: a democracy under stress but still functioning. Public pressure forced a presidential retreat. Protests work. Institutions push back. Citizens stay engaged.

Ukraine’s democracy is imperfect and fragile—but it’s alive. The operation succeeded only in Russian information space, manufacturing the illusion of internal collapse for domestic consumption while the real Ukraine continued the messy, contentious work of democratic governance.

Ukraine’s parliament will convene on 31 July to review President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s draft law 13533, which promises to restore independence to the country’s anti-corruption agencies, according to parliamentary speaker Ruslan Stefanchuk.

The speaker said that he would propose adopting the bill immediately as a basis and in full, while supporting its urgent signing. Beyond Zelenskyy’s anti-corruption measure, parliament will also consider other “important legislative initiatives,” Stefanchuk added.

The session will come nine days after parliament passed law №12414 on 22 July, which amended the Criminal Procedure Code to make NABU and the Specialized Anti-corruption Prosecutor’s Office dependent on decisions by the prosecutor general. Zelenskyy signed the document the same evening.

The 22 July law triggered protest actions across multiple Ukrainian cities. Amid the protests, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with the heads of law enforcement and anti-corruption agencies, including the Prosecutor General.

 Zelenskyy announced later he submitted the new draft law to parliament, stating it would ensure “strength for the law enforcement system” and preserve “all norms for the independence of anti-corruption institutions.”

The National Anti-corruption Bureau confirmed that Zelenskyy’s bill would restore all powers and independence guarantees for NABU and SAPO that were affected by the earlier legislation.

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) have stated that the bill submitted by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy restores all guarantees of independence for these institutions.

“Bill No. 13533, submitted by the President of Ukraine as urgent, restores all procedural powers and guarantees of independence for NABU and SAPO,” the agencies report.

NABU and SAPO participated in drafting the text and are urging the Ukrainian Parliament to adopt the President’s initiative as soon as possible, both in the first reading and as a whole.

“This will help prevent threats to the criminal proceedings investigated by NABU and SAPO,” they emphasize. 

The work of Ukraine’s independent anti-corruption bodies is a key requirement for its path to European membership. It also affects the future of Ukraine’s aid, which mostly depends on Ukraine amid US President Donald Trump’s foreign policy. The bloc’s leaders have appealed to Kyiv with questions on the controversial law and urged transparency in reform.

After Zelenskyy decided to respond to the mass rallies and work on the law restoring the activities of NABU and SAPO, the EU viewed such actions positively.

Western trust under threat as Zelenskyy nears signing controversial law that crashes Ukraine’s anti-corruption system

At the same time, European Commission Spokesperson Stefan de Keersmaecker emphasized the need for continued efforts in this direction.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy signed a law Tuesday dismantling Ukraine’s anti-corruption agencies.

The timing was disastrous: Brussels had secretly scheduled 18 July to open Ukraine’s first EU negotiating cluster, bypassing Hungary entirely, but abandoned the plan after Ukraine’s anti-corruption crackdown, according to European Pravda sources within EU institutions.

Zelenskyy knew about the plan. He’d been personally involved in discussions with Danish officials and EU leadership since late June, European Pravda reported, citing unnamed European officials. But instead of supporting this diplomatic breakthrough, Ukraine systematically undermined its reform credentials by rejecting the Bureau of Economic Security selection results, conducting searches of activist Vitalii Shabunin’s home, and finally signing the law gutting NABU and SAPO independence.

Brussels was ready to break its own rules for Ukraine

The Danish EU presidency and European Commission had crafted something unprecedented: legal measures to sideline Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán, who had systematically blocked Ukraine’s accession, completely.

Bloomberg reported in May that member states pushed the Commission to explore options for opening Ukraine’s first negotiating chapter despite Hungarian objections.

The breakthrough insight: while unanimity is required to start and complete EU accession negotiations, sources told Bloomberg it’s not a legal requirement for opening individual clusters. The Commission informed member states that it intended to send the European Council a first report on starting cluster discussions with Ukraine and Moldova.

After years of Hungarian obstruction, 26 member states were willing to risk institutional precedent.

The “parallel negotiations” mechanism

The mechanism was elegant: conduct “parallel negotiations” where 26 EU states would negotiate with Ukraine while Moldova received formal recognition. When Moldova opened negotiating clusters, the 26 states would issue statements confirming Ukraine had completed the same work and that only Hungary’s veto prevented legal advancement.

• Inter-Governmental Conferences: The Danish presidency was prepared to convene working bodies pivotal to enlargement that don’t require Hungarian consent
• Political weight: Though legally non-binding for Ukraine, these would carry enormous political significance
• Synchronized progress: Ukraine’s advancement would be coordinated with Moldova’s formal recognition

The Danish presidency, which described enlargement as a “geopolitical necessity,” had exhausted diplomatic options with Hungary.

Hungary systematic obstruction

Orbán had forced Brussels into this position through relentless obstruction. After blocking progress during Hungary’s 2024 EU presidency, he staged a “national consultation” where 95% of 2.3 million participants opposed Ukraine membership—though an opposition poll found 58% Hungarian support for Ukraine’s EU bid.

Zelenskyy met with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen during the NATO summit in The Hague. He flew to Denmark on 3 July for private negotiations. Final details were hammered out in Rome on 10 July. Everything was set for the 18 July ceremony in Brussels.

European officials were prepared to risk institutional precedent. Ukraine chose that exact moment to implode its reform credentials.

How Ukraine sabotaged itself

The self-sabotage unfolded in a devastating sequence:

• 9 July: The Ukrainian government rejected the winner of a transparent, EU-supported competition to head the Bureau of Economic Security. The government simply overturned the selection results with no explanation.
• 11 July: Law enforcement raided anti-corruption activist Vitalii Shabunin’s home without a court warrant. They also searched the mother of fallen Hero of Ukraine pilot Andrii “Juice” Pilshchykov simply because Shabunin had briefly stayed there.
• 14 July: Deputy Prime Minister Olha Stefanishyna announced her resignation as Ukraine’s chief EU negotiator—replacing a negotiator at such a sensitive moment gave Brussels another reason to pause.

Denmark quietly abandoned the 18 July proposal. European Pravda sources reported EU officials asking: “WTF? What is going on?”

Brussels draws the line

EU Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos warned Deputy Prime Minister Taras Kachka that the anti-corruption law would have “serious consequences for the entire negotiation process.” Some member states now believe “it would have been better not to rush into opening the first cluster.”

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called Zelenskyy directly to express “strong concerns.” Brussels views this as democratic backsliding comparable to Georgia’s retreat.

Economic consequences mounting

The OECD warned that undermining anti-corruption agencies will hurt:

• Defense investments in Ukraine
• Reconstruction funding from international partners
• Future borrowing capacity as creditors reassess risk

But European officials doubt the Presidential Office takes these warnings seriously—they are accustomed to Brussels making threats without decisive action.

Explore further

Zelenskyy’s scandalous law weakening anti-graft watchdogs takes effect (updated)

Putin wins without trying

Anti-corruption architect Daria Kaleniuk pointed out the bitter irony: Zelenskyy “just gave Putin his best argument.”

Putin’s original justification for war was that Ukraine was “losing sovereignty to foreign partners, establishing anti-corruption institutions with foreign experts.” Ukrainian MPs are now making Putin’s argument for him.

Ukraine will fall behind Moldova in EU accession talks. The “decoupling” Brussels tried to avoid becomes inevitable—not because of Hungarian obstruction, but because of Ukraine own choices. As one European official noted: “Ukraine has done the dirty work instead of Viktor Orbán.”

What the law actually does

The legislation Zelenskyy signed grants the Prosecutor General sweeping authority to:

• Reassign NABU investigations to other agencies
• Issue binding instructions to anti-corruption bodies
• Unilaterally close high-level corruption cases
• Control SAPO operations through mandatory coordination

Transparency International Ukraine called it the dismantling of “prosecutorial independence.”

The timing was particularly damaging. Just as European officials prepared to risk institutional precedent for Ukraine’s benefit, Kyiv chose to demolish its reform credentials.

The protest signs in Kyiv yesterday said everything: “My father did not die for this.”

When Ukrainians took to the streets 11 years ago in Ukraine’s Euromaidan Revolution, they had simple demands: a country where one would want to live. A place where everyone is treated equally under the law and justice is not an empty word.

Yesterday, in 72 hours, Ukraine’s government destroyed those hopes by dismantling what took a decade to build.

The rushed adoption hidden in another law, the dirty tactics pressuring MPs, the ongoing investigations against Zelenskyy’s inner circle, the flimsy accusations against Ukraine’s anti-corruption organs invoking old traffic accidents, leave no mistake: this legal theater was a planned assault on the system of checks and balances created since Euromaidan.

The significance of this system for Ukraine is profound. Since Aristotle’s time, dividing power into legislative, executive, and judiciary has separated democratic governance from monarchy. In Ukraine, it was largely theater—and each revolution rose against increasing authoritarianism.

NABU and SAPO, whatever their flaws, were the first real separation of power in Ukraine. They could be improved, made more effective. But gutting their independence isn’t about effectiveness—it’s about destroying Ukraine’s capacity to check those in power and resist authoritarianism.

This is what’s happening now. The young people who flooded Ukrainian cities in protest are defending republicanism against monarchy. This desire sets Ukrainians apart from Russia and Belarus—the promise of European integration sealed with the blood of Euromaidan protesters who died for freedom.

This promise of functioning democracy, the best guarantee of dignified life, drove Ukraine since 2014 to reject the Russian path where personal freedom gets discarded and authority worshipped. It drives Ukrainians defending their land against the Russian invasion.

That promise had concrete stakes. NABU independence was the condition for visa-free travel, EU candidacy talks, and every step toward European integration. Those foundations just crumbled.

Ukrainians on the frontline didn’t die for Zelenskyy’s power to concentrate authority and enrich himself. They died for their families, for a future where their children wouldn’t choose between dignity and survival.

Power is intoxicating. It is a bitter irony that Zelenskyy became the villain from his own TV show—the corrupt president enjoying the impunity he once campaigned against.

He signed the law with record speed, buried the attack in photo-ops, ignored thousand-strong protests in his evening address.

Since today, a second front has opened in Ukraine—between those preserving Ukraine’s democratic future and those sacrificing it for personal protection. This fight determines whether Ukraine’s victory over Russia means anything, or whether we become the corrupt autocracy we once fought to escape.

Zelenskyy can still reverse course—withdraw his signature, restore what was broken. But each day this law stands, Ukraine moves closer to becoming the country it once fought to escape.

The choice between republic and monarchy remains his to make.

History is watching.

Russian intelligence services are attempting to destabilize Ukraine amid the anti-corruption crisis, Ukraine’s Defense Intelligence warns. Kremlin agents are actively studying the internal situation in order to exploit the wave of protests linked to the adoption of the new law, which enables control over independent anti-corruption bodies. 

According to the agency, Russia’s goal is to undermine Ukraine’s ability to resist full-scale military aggression and to discredit the country on the international stage. 

“Russia intends to discredit Ukraine in the eyes of the world to weaken or destroy Western support for the armed struggle against the aggressor,” the Ukrainian Defense Intelligence says.

Inside Ukraine, the Kremlin sees an opportunity to capitalize on public discontent to stir chaos and polarize society. This is not just about propaganda — intelligence warns of possible provocations orchestrated directly from Moscow.

“To escalate the protests, deepen polarization, and plunge Ukrainian society into chaos… provocations inspired by Moscow are not ruled out,” the agency cautions.

The Defense Intelligence stresses that the country is in the midst of a genocidal war, in which Russia employs not only weapons but also manipulations, disinformation, and internal sabotage.

“The Ukrainian nation is living through a genocidal war in which the aggressor is trying by all means to destroy our state,” the agency emphasizes.

On 22 July, Lieutenant General Kyrylo Budanov, the head of the Ukrainian Defense Intelligence, called for internal disagreements to be resolved through open dialogue.

“Ukrainian history has taught us, a nation loses when it is torn apart by internal strife. We face a common misfortune and a common enemy. That is why internal disagreements should be resolved through open dialogue to achieve a single shared goal, to defend our country,” he claimed.

He added that he is confident: Ukraine will be saved by strong armed forces and institutions.

A law curbing anti-graft watchdogs has officially taken effect in Ukraine, triggering public protest and sharp criticism from legal observers and European officials. Submitted by the ruling Servant of the People party, which holds a majority in the Verkhovna Rada, the bill was passed on 22 July and signed into law by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that same evening — a rare instance of rapid enactment.

Key anti-graft watchdogs stripped of independence

Law No. 12414 was officially published on 23 July in the Rada’s Holos Ukrainy newspaper, granting it full legal force. As a result, the prosecutor general now has the authority to reassign investigations from the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) to other law enforcement bodies, issue binding written instructions to NABU detectives, serve as the effective head of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), and unilaterally close top-level corruption cases.

In addition, SAPO’s procedural autonomy is severely curtailed. The law removes the agency’s ability to determine NABU’s jurisdiction in exceptional cases, strips its head of the right to resolve jurisdictional disputes, and prevents SAPO leadership from altering appellate or cassation complaints submitted by its prosecutors. Transparency International Ukraine stated that the law is an attack on anti-graft safeguards and warned it dismantles the foundations of prosecutorial independence. 

Explore further

Abuse of power: Ukraine’s Civil Anti-Corruption Council urges Zelenskyy to veto new law undermining anti-corruption system

EU sounds alarm

The law was authored and pushed forward by MP Maksym Buzhanskyi, a member of Zelenskyy’s Servant of the People party. It introduces sweeping amendments to Ukraine’s Criminal Code and bypassed standard parliamentary procedures. Critics argue it violated Article 116 of the Verkhovna Rada’s regulations by radically altering the subject of the original legislation.

EU Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos said she was “seriously concerned” over the Rada vote.

“The dismantling of key safeguards protecting NABU’s independence is a serious step back. Independent bodies, like NABU [and] SAPO, are essential for [Ukraine’s] EU path. Rule of Law remains in the very center of EU accession negotiations,” she wrote on X.

Cities erupt in protest after Rada passes the law

The law’s passage sparked mass protests in Kyiv and multiple other Ukrainian cities including Lviv, Dnipro, Odesa, and Ivano-Frankivsk late on 22 July. Demonstrators accused Zelenskyy and parliament of dismantling Ukraine’s most trusted anti-corruption structures. 

Explore further

From Lviv to Odesa: Ukrainians take to streets to save anti-corruption agencies

Zelenskyy offers no explanation beyond ‘Russian influence’

Despite public backlash and mounting criticism, Zelenskyy signed the bill into law, giving only a vague and unsupported rationale. In a video address on 22 July, he said that “anti-corruption infrastructure will work, but must be cleared of Russian influence.” He added that justice must become “more visible” and said cases involving fugitive officials should finally be pursued. However, he gave no details on how curbing anti-graft watchdogs would aid in countering Russian infiltration.

Intelligence raids, spy accusations, and political timing

Before the legislative push, starting 21 July, the SBU security service and Prosecutor General’s Office carried out approximately 80 searches targeting 19 NABU staff across multiple oblasts. Employees were accused of state treason, illicit trade with Russia, and acting on behalf of oligarchs. The State Bureau of Investigations simultaneously reopened dormant car crash cases involving NABU staff.

SAPO expressed concern that the SBU and prosecutor’s office had accessed covert investigative data, risking the exposure of classified operations. They warned that SBU actions could disrupt ongoing probes by revealing details of undercover measures.

Why watchdog independence mattered

NABU and SAPO were formed in 2015 after the 2014 Revolution of Dignity to combat entrenched elite corruption. NABU was empowered to investigate top-tier officials including the president (if no longer in office), ministers, MPs, judges, and high-ranking bureaucrats. SAPO was designed to prosecute those cases autonomously, free from political oversight. The agencies’ independence was a central requirement for Ukraine’s EU integration.

Tatarigami, a prominent Ukrainian analyst, wrote that the law creates mechanisms to derail or redirect any investigation that threatens presidential allies — not only under Zelenskyy but under any future president. He warned that the logic of citing “Russian influence” as a justification is flawed, since agencies like the SBU have themselves been infiltrated by Russian agents in the past.

Update: OECD warns Ukraine risks losing defense investment

According to European Pravda, the OECD has warned Kyiv that the law undermining NABU and SAPO could jeopardize both Ukraine’s OECD accession and its appeal to international investors.

In a letter dated 22 July, Julia Fromholz, head of the OECD Anti-Corruption Division, told the president’s office that law No. 12414 weakens anti-corruption safeguards and risks breaching Ukraine’s obligations under OECD standards.

New draft law aims to cancel restrictions on NABU and SAPO

A new bill has been prepared in the Verkhovna Rada to cancel the restrictions on NABU and SAPO introduced by the controversial law No. 12414 adopted on 22 July. The initial law limits the powers of Ukraine’s anti-corruption bodies under the pretext of regulating wartime investigations into missing persons.

The timing was surgical. As security services arrested their own officials for taking $300,000 bribes from draft dodgers, Ukraine’s parliament voted to gut the very agencies designed to catch such corruption.

On 22 July 2025, lawmakers passed Bill No. 12414 by 263 votes, effectively ending a decade of post-Euromaidan anti-corruption reforms. The legislation transfers control of corruption investigations from independent agencies—NABU and SAPO—to the politically appointed Prosecutor General.

The vote came one day after authorities conducted over 70 searches against NABU employees, citing alleged Russian intelligence links that critics say provided convenient cover for the institutional demolition.

This matters because Ukraine built these institutions specifically to investigate officials close to the presidency—the very people now beyond reach. NABU had been investigating Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov in land schemes, defense sector corruption, and cases involving Zelenskyy associates. With the Prosecutor General—who reports directly to presidential chief of staff Andriy Yermak—now controlling all corruption cases, those investigations effectively end.

Western partners have expressed concern, with G7 ambassadors planning to raise the issue with Ukrainian officials. EU financial support depends on democratic governance progress—progress that this law reverses. The European Commission’s Ukraine Facility and IMF loans were conditioned on maintaining independent anti-corruption institutions that no longer exist in any meaningful form.

For Daria Kaleniuk, this represents more than institutional rollback. The executive director of the Anti-Corruption Action Center, who helped design these agencies after Euromaidan, calls it Ukraine’s “Yanukovych moment”—a return to the system of untouchables that sparked the 2014 revolution.

In an exclusive interview with Euromaidan Press, she warns that Zelenskyy is creating the very conditions Putin uses to justify Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Political control over anti-corruption institutions

Euromaidan Press: Ukraine’s Parliament just passed a law putting all corruption investigations under one politically appointed prosecutor. Ukrainian activists like you are calling this a return to Yanukovych times. What does that comparison mean?

Daria Kaleniuk: It means that Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko will control all investigations against top officials in the country. He will have access to all cases of the independent agencies NABU and SAPO.

He will be able to stop these cases, give orders on how to investigate or not investigate, change prosecutors, and take cases outside of NABU to give them to other agencies.

So it returns complete control to the prosecutor general, who is 100% loyal to the president, over justice in Ukraine. This is exactly what we were trying to move away from since the Revolution of Dignity.

During the Yanukovych period, he had a prosecutor general named Viktor Pshonka who safeguarded businesses and monopolies for Yanukovych and his associates. There was the so-called “family”—close family and friends of Yanukovych who controlled the most lucrative businesses in the country. No one could investigate them because the prosecutor general made sure they were untouchable.

We are coming back to the  era of untouchables in Ukraine.

If you are loyal to Zelenskyy, you will be untouchable and have access to lucrative contracts, especially in the defense sector where most Ukrainian taxpayer money is spent. You can steal, commit fraud, produce bad equipment, not deliver on time – and there will be no justice.

This is the  Yanukovych moment for Zelenskyy. 

What Euromaidan stood against

Corruption you can’t imagine

This is what Ukraine is fighting against

What does this mean for Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations?

It’s horrible. We’ve been reporting developments in NABU and SAPO to international partners for 10 years. This is our progress toward building good governance and the rule of law, getting closer to the EU.

More than 90% of Ukrainians now support EU aspirations. All those EU accession developments, money granted through the Ukraine Facility in exchange for reforms, IMF loans – they are in big danger because the fundamentals on which these programs were built are being destroyed by Zelenskyy and his associates to protect family members and close businesses from investigation.

Simultaneously, there’s a huge crackdown on watchdog organizations. There were these absurd charges against Vitaly Shabunin [-her colleague-], claiming he served in the army inappropriately. We expect more charges against Vitaly to silence him.

Zelenskyy and Yermak want to silence us. They will try to develop criminal charges like state treason. Basically, you are a state traitor in Ukraine when you’re saying the truth.

This is not what the Ukrainian people are fighting against Russian aggression for. This is actually what we are fighting against, because Russia wants to suppress freedom of speech, independent thinking, and criticism of authorities.

Democracy is very deep in the veins of the Ukrainian people. All those fallen heroes were fighting for a completely different Ukraine than Zelenskyy is now trying to build – where there is freedom, dignity, and justice with the rule of law.

When Zelenskyy silences independent media and watchdog organizations, he is crossing many red lines inside Ukrainian society, which could lead to a very dangerous explosion. To prevent this,  Zelenskyy must stop this law.

If he signed it, he has to withdraw his signature.

All those who invented this attack on anti-corruption bodies are either intentionally or unintentionally helping the Kremlin win this war from inside Ukraine.

Start of their end

You’ve been doing this work since 2012 through three different presidents. What’s the common pattern when leaders try to capture such institutions? How does this moment feel different?

It is the start of their end. Agony.

It’s complicated in Zelenskyy’s case because we’re simultaneously fighting a large-scale war. If there were no war, Zelenskyy and his parliament would not be in power.

Unfortunately, for Zelenskyy and Yermak, the only strategy they’re thinking about is maintaining power. This causes them to roll back reforms and dismantle democracy because they understand they cannot win democratic elections.

It smells like they feel elections are coming. All these crackdowns are related to the fear of not being in power longer.

How to stay in power? Get rid of watchdog organizations naming names and saying the truth. Get rid of independent media – sanction media owners to shut down outlets like Ukrainska Pravda, Novaya Vremya. Intimidate individual activists and journalists. Then destroy possible political opponents.

There is a lot of trust in Ukraine’s armed forces. Therefore, the State Bureau of Investigations will attack military commanders who have the trust of the Ukrainian people.

In Shabunin’s case, Zelenskyy and Yermak showed they can use this instrument to destroy any person serving in the military.

Kaleniuk’s colleague targeted

“Obvious revenge”: Ukraine prosecutes the activist who created its anti-corruption system

Zelenskyy becomes villain against whom he campaigned in 2019

It’s ironic that Zelenskyy campaigned as the anti-corruption outsider in 2019. Now he’s dismantling the very institutions built to fulfill these promises. Why this turn? Why now? Doesn’t he understand this is suicidal?

I think he needs to thank Mr. Andriy Yermak, who controls 90% of information flow to Zelensky, shapes his mind, and helps him appoint very loyal managers.

Yermak appointed Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko, basically suggested him as a very good prospective Pshonka for Zelensky.

Zelenskyy might not understand or is too busy and tired. But he’s not coping with his role as leader, which should reflect the mood of the Ukrainian people.

If he entrusted so much power to Yermak and Oleg Tatarov – guys against democracy, against fundamental freedoms, against checks and balances – it reflects his view of society.

He campaigned in “Servant of the People” against untouchables. He created untouchables inside his circle. So he became the [anti-]hero against whom he was campaigning.

Could you give us more context about what NABU and SAPO have accomplished that is now at risk?

They have charged hundreds of people in high-level positions, tackling critical cases in different sectors.

Just this year, there were charges in defense sector food procurement, against key state officials in land schemes, and charges against Oleksiy Chernyshov, the former deputy prime minister and close friend of Zelenskyy.

We’ve been using these cases since 2022 as powerful arguments to advocate for more weapons, more support for Ukraine, fast-track European integration, the Danish model.

These are the narratives the Kremlin tried to spread through propaganda – that Ukraine is absolutely corrupt, that Zelenskyy is autocratic, oppresses opposition, and silences critics.

Two months ago, I was defending Zelenskyy against this. When Trump was saying Zelenskyy is a dictator, I wrote pieces and did interviews saying there is a system of checks and balances in Ukraine, these anti-corruption institutions are working.

Now I can’t say anything. Yermak, Zelenskyy, and the MPs voting for this law have created beautiful arguments for the Kremlin to make Ukraine a country not worth supporting.

I hope international partners will keep supporting Ukraine with military assistance – it’s critical for our armed forces dying defending Ukraine. But clearly, Russia will use this to discredit support.

Is NABU infested with Russian spies?

The government says this is about national security after finding Russian spies in NABU. You’re saying it’s about protecting corrupt officials. How do we know who’s right?

It’s very simple. The Security Service, Prosecutor General’s Office, and State Bureau of Investigations conducted simultaneously 80 searches against more than 15 NABU detectives and their family members without court warrants, claiming it was a special operation to unveil Russian spies.

So far, we have only two cases in which a suspicion was announced. All the other cases are not related to cooperating with Russia—car accidents from years ago, other crazy cases.

Even the security-related charges aren’t extraordinary cases with clearly significant security damage. One NABU worker allegedly sold cannabis to Dagestan through relatives with Russian citizenship. Another allegedly provided information to a former security service officer during the Yanukovych period.

Simultaneously, the security service is verifying how SAPO handles state secrecy and getting access to all pending investigations—whistleblowers, agents cooperating with NABU, and all operative information.

They already accessed files and saw where NABU was looking. Coincidentally, the next day, Zelenskyy passed a law empowering the prosecutor general with all rights to control when NABU moves and breathes.

He’s directly receiving orders from Yermak, executing Zelenskyy’s will. Zelenskyy is pissed off that NABU and SAPO are investigating his close associates like Chernyshov.

Perfect moment

The timing seems strategic – wartime, no elections, weakened opposition. Was this the perfect moment?

It is the perfect moment because our European partners are on vacation drinking prosecco and enjoying the summer seaside. I’m joking obviously, but that’s important – how to mobilize proper reaction from European partners.

Protests against law to gut anti-corruption agencies are starting in Ukraine. Here is Lviv

Today, the parliament voted for law #12414 to bring the National Anti-Corruption Bureau and Specialized Anti-Corruption Office under control of politically-appointed General Prosecutor,… pic.twitter.com/9H6PeDH07K

— Euromaidan Press (@EuromaidanPress) July 22, 2025

Overall, this attack is strategically important for the Kremlin and plays into their hands. If they’re trying to accuse us of state treason, they should look at themselves – how they’re creating reasons and grounds for the Kremlin to attack Ukraine internationally.

What concretely happens now? If there’s a billion-dollar corruption case tomorrow, who investigates it?

The Prosecutor General controls that case. NABU can investigate, but there will be just the name NABU. The substance of having a truly independent agency with SAPO supervision will be over.

It means one person, Kravchenko, goes to another person, Yermak, and they agree: “Should we investigate this billion-dollar case? Probably not, but we’ll ask this defense producer for 10% bribe. Let’s introduce our affiliated companies as co-owners, and then we won’t investigate anything. Everybody’s happy.”

We are building new oligarchs in Ukraine. This is the thinking happening inside the president’s office among those designing this scheme.

10 years of Ukraine’s progress annulled

What does this mean for Ukraine’s European integration prospects?

It puts us back 10 years. I have déjà vu of November 2013, when Yanukovych refused to sign the EU association agreement and told the Ukrainian people, “I don’t care what you think.”

The establishment of these institutions was written in all documents related to EU accession, IMF loans, and visa liberalization. If you dismantle these agencies, you can’t remove them from these documents. These are Ukraine’s obligations, which are now nullified. All progress will be nullified.

How to repair that overnight when the destruction is already done? It’s impossible.

Parliament members voting for this trash were so happy, congratulating themselves. Folks like Maksym Buzhanskyi from Servant of the People were celebrating with Yuliia Tymoshenko, who spreads the same messages Putin spread in early February 2022 before invading Ukraine.

Putin said Ukraine is losing sovereignty to foreign partners, establishing anti-corruption institutions with foreign experts. For that, Ukraine needs to be liberated. This is how Putin started the large-scale war.

Now our MPs are saying the same thing Putin was saying. Are they nuts? They should quit and work in Russia.

International partners stay mum as red lines crossed

What has the international response been? Is it what you expected?

Very slow. This escalation could have been prevented if before the Ukraine Reform Conference, when the Cabinet violated the law and didn’t appoint a BEB director, URC leaders clearly told Zelenskyy it’s unacceptable.

At the end, as there was no reaction, came these searches of Shabunin without court warrants, absurd accusations.

Did we see the international partner’s reaction? No, everybody was waiting. “Let’s see how it develops.” 

“Everybody doesn’t care about corruption and the rule of law anymore. We’re the bosses in our home. We decide what we do. We don’t care about your reforms.”

This approach was bred by self-censorship of our international partners.

Daria, thank you very much. Let’s hope President Zelenskyy will roll back this law.

After this interview was recorded, Zelenskyy signed the law

Zelenskyy signs controversial law undermining Ukraine’s anti-corruption agencies

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has signed Law No. 12414, which grants the Prosecutor General’s Office control over the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP).

The official website of the Ukrainian Parliament has confirmed that the president approved the law despite mass protests from anti-corruption watchdogs, European officials, and activists.

People in Lviv, Dnipro, and Odesa took to the streets to protest against the law that brings Ukraine back to the times of former pro-Russian President Victor Yanukovych, who was ousted in the 2013-2014 Euromaidan protests. 

The bill provides that:

• The Prosecutor General gains access to all NABU cases or can grant such access to any other prosecutor.
• The Prosecutor General can issue mandatory written instructions to NABU detectives and, if they are not followed, can change jurisdiction by transferring cases to other agencies,
• Has the right to close investigations at the request of the defense,
  Independently resolves jurisdiction disputes,
• Signs notes of suspicion against high-ranking officials personally.

The head of SAPO loses the right to participate in prosecutor groups, as this is decided solely by the Prosecutor General. 

Ukraine’s parliament voted to strip anti-corruption agencies of their independence just as a major bribery scandal emerged within the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), exposing the government’s attack on oversight institutions while corruption flourishes unchecked.

The $300,000 bribery case involving an SBU official who helped draft dodgers avoid military service reveals systemic corruption within the same agency that justified dismantling independent anti-corruption institutions.

The timing demonstrates how Ukraine is eliminating accountability mechanisms while the problems they were designed to address persist across the system.

SBU official sold draft exemptions for $300,000

An SBU Department for Protection of National Statehood sector chief exploited his unit’s role in a National Police investigation targeting illegal border crossings by draft dodgers. Through two intermediaries—including a former SBU employee—he demanded $300,000 from a suspect to destroy case materials and leak investigative details, NABU and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) reported.

The official threatened prosecution under more severe charges if the suspect refused to pay. Investigators documented him receiving $72,000 before filing charges under Article 368 of Ukraine’s Criminal Code for abuse of office.

The scheme targeted Ukraine’s most sensitive wartime issue—military service evasion during an existential fight for survival. The corruption reached into the security apparatus responsible for protecting national defense, showing how graft undermines Ukraine’s war effort at the highest levels.

The SBU confirmed their Internal Security Department discovered the corruption in 2024. The case was subsequently transferred to the State Bureau of Investigations, then to NABU due to the large bribe amount—following standard procedures for high-value corruption cases.

Parliament guts anti-corruption oversight

Hours after NABU announced the completed investigation, Parliament passed Bill No. 12414 by 263 votes, fundamentally restructuring Ukraine’s anti-corruption system. The legislation transfers key oversight powers from independent agencies to the politically-appointed Prosecutor General.

The new rules allow the Prosecutor General to reassign NABU cases, override SAPO prosecutorial decisions, and resolve inter-agency disputes. SAPO prosecutors now report to the Prosecutor General rather than their own leadership, while NABU’s director must seek permission to claim jurisdiction over cases.

NABU and SAPO were created after the 2014 revolution specifically to investigate high-level corruption with independence from political interference. The new law eliminates that independence entirely.

Political analyst Ihor Chalenko told Euromaidan Press the changes create “a lasting centralization of authority over Ukraine’s law enforcement system.” All investigative agencies now operate under a single hierarchy, with the Prosecutor General holding decisive power over case assignments and prosecutorial decisions.

Explore further

Security service officials took $300,000 bribes as Ukraine guts corruption oversight

A pattern of institutional conflict

This isn’t the first time Ukraine’s security agencies and anti-corruption bodies have clashed. In 2017, the SBU detained seven NABU employees working undercover, sparking what became known as the “war of anti-corruptionists.” That conflict escalated to threats of dismissing NABU’s director, prompting warnings from the US that aid could be cut if anti-corruption institutions were dismantled.

The SBU has also faced criticism for targeting journalists investigating corruption. In February 2024, the agency was exposed for illegally surveilling investigative outlet Bihus.Info, while in 2024, President Zelenskyy fired the SBU’s cybersecurity chief for allegedly retaliating against a journalist who investigated his family’s questionable property purchases.

These patterns suggest institutional tensions that extend beyond the current crisis, with the SBU repeatedly finding itself involved in controversies while serving as both investigator and subject of corruption probes.

International stakes rise

The G7 Ambassadors expressed “serious concerns” about developments at NABU and requested meetings with Ukrainian government officials. Ukraine’s EU aspirations and billions in Western aid depend heavily on anti-corruption performance, making institutional changes a potential threat to international support.

The Anti-Corruption Action Center described recent developments as “an attempt to destroy independent institutions” to prevent investigations into officials close to President Zelenskyy. The European Union has not yet considered suspending funding over the anti-corruption agency changes, but observers worry about the precedent.

Why this matters for Ukraine’s future

The timing of these separate developments—a completed corruption case against the SBU and Parliament’s vote to centralize anti-corruption control—reveals the complexity of Ukraine’s institutional challenges during wartime.

With elections suspended and political opposition limited, independent anti-corruption agencies represented among the last checks on executive power. The SBU case demonstrates that corruption exists across the security apparatus, raising questions about whether concentrating oversight authority in the Prosecutor General’s Office addresses the problem or simply relocates it.

Ukraine must simultaneously fight external enemies and maintain internal accountability. The latest revelations suggest the corruption challenge extends throughout the law enforcement system that’s now being reorganized under centralized control.

People in Lviv, Dnipro, and Odesa took to the streets to protest the adoption of bill No. 12414 by the Ukrainian Parliament. It restricts the independence of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), reports Suspilne.

On 22 July, the parliament approved bill No. 12414, which introduces changes to the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the pre-trial investigation of cases related to enforced disappearances under martial law conditions.

According to Ukrainian deputy Anastasiia Radina, amendments were added at the last moment that “turn SAPO into a decorative institution and make the activities of NABU and SAPO fully dependent on the will of the Prosecutor General.”

The bill provides that:

• The Prosecutor General gains access to all NABU cases or can grant such access to any other prosecutor.
• The Prosecutor General can issue mandatory written instructions to NABU detectives and, if they are not followed, can change jurisdiction by transferring cases to other agencies,
• Has the right to close investigations at the request of the defense,
• Independently resolves jurisdiction disputes,
• Signs notes of suspicion against high-ranking officials personally.

The head of SAPO loses the right to participate in prosecutor groups, as this is decided solely by the Prosecutor General, Hromadske reports. 

In Lviv, people gathered near the Taras Shevchenko monument to protest against the law. Co-organizer Justyna Moyseev said initially 30 people registered for the protest, but the expected number grew, and is expected to reach 100.

During the protest, people chanted slogans such as “Hands off NABU,” “Change or die,” and “Corruption is the death of the future.”

Ukraine’s parliament votes to gut anti-corruption agencies amid Russian spy scandal (UPDATED)

“One must always remember that the Ukrainian people stand together primarily because we want victory, peace, and to move toward the EU. Only for this reason do Ukrainians endure and do not want to cause trouble. But it seems the authorities are forgetting this a little. We want to remind them,” said one Lviv protester, Roman Schmidt.

Residents of Dnipro also joined the protest. Participant Anna stressed that she does not support the adoption of this bill.

“This directly affects the fact that corruption in the country will most likely flourish, and that’s not okay. They won’t be independent,” she said. 

A similar protest gathered in Odesa, where people called on the president not to sign the bill, chanting “Protect democratic institutions.” 

Kyiv is also protesting against the bill. People are carrying posters reading “People’s wrath is scarier than NABU and SAPO,” “Money hates silence,” “No to the destruction of the anti-corruption system.”

On 22 July, the Ukrainian Parliament passed bill No. 12414, which effectively destroys the independence of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), says the Independent Anti-Corruption Commission (NAKO). 

The NAKO emphasizes that this decision will severely undermine trust in Ukraine on the international stage. The development of anti-corruption institutions, supported by civil society and international partners since 2015, was a key condition for Ukraine’s progress towards the EU and NATO.

The liquidation of NABU’s and SAPO’s independence threatens further international aid.

The law was adopted amid high-profile searches at NABU, where security forces uncovered an FSB agent working inside the bureau who passed information to Russia.

“Yesterday we saw SBU searches that showed NABU is not perfect, and that is true, but today these searches have been used by the authorities to dismantle an independent anti-corruption investigation,” says NAKO senior researcher Tetiana Nikolaienko.

Now the Prosecutor General becomes the de facto head of SAPO prosecutors, gains full access to NABU cases, has the right to transfer them to other bodies, decides jurisdiction disputes, and signs indictments against high-ranking officials. This destroys the possibility of conducting impartial investigations according to the law.

Meanwhile, the Anti-Corruption Action Center stresses that President Zelenskyy’s signature under this law will return the country to the times of former pro-Russian President Victor Yanukovych.

“Under these conditions, NABU, SAPO, and the High Anti-Corruption Court lose all meaning as Zelenskyy-installed Prosecutor General will stop investigations against all the president’s friends,” adds NAKO.

Accordingly, there is no point in electronic asset declarations, punishment for illegal enrichment, special confiscation, or other anti-corruption reforms.

Vitalii Shabunin, Ukraine’s top anti-corruption activist and head of Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Action Center, has been charged in a controversial criminal case. The State Bureau of Investigation has accused him of evasion of military service and misuse of a vehicle intended for the military, sparking a public outcry and allegations of political persecution, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty writes. 

According to investigators, Shabunin allegedly “systematically evaded” military service during martial law and illegally used a vehicle imported as humanitarian aid for the Armed Forces, including for personal travel in Kyiv. They claim the vehicle was never officially registered for military use.

He has been charged under two articles of the Ukrainian Criminal Code:

• Part 4, Article 409 — evasion of military service under martial law
• Part 2, Article 190 — large-scale fraud

The maximum penalty is up to 10 years in prison. 

Shabunin’s response

The activist has denied all allegations and called the case politically motivated. He published a photo of his military ID issued on 25 February 2022, the day after Russia’s full-scale invasion began.

He says he served on the front lines with Ukraine’s Armed Forces from the first days of the war, first near Kyiv, then in eastern Ukraine. After combat duty, he joined the Ministry of Defense to work on logistics reform and digital projects, including the Delta situational awareness system, according to the BBC.

In February 2025, he was transferred to a border guard unit in Kharkiv Oblast, a move he links to retaliation for his outspoken criticism of the government.

Civil society reacts: “An attack on free speech and democracy”

More than 50 non-governmental organizations, human rights groups, and civic organizations have appealed to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko, and the State Bureau of Investigation’s Head, Oleksii Sukhachov, demanding that the investigation be dropped.

In their joint statement, they warned that the case is either a sign of gross incompetence or deliberate pressure on a government critic. Shabunin continued his anti-corruption work while in uniform, publicly opposing the sabotage of reforms and poor governance and defending the independence of Ukraine’s anti-graft institutions, Deutsche Welle reports.

Olena Shcherban, deputy director of Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Action Center, has called the case an attempt to destroy an organization that has fought for transparency for years. It could also be a broader crackdown on independent activists, a dangerous precedent for democracy under martial law.

Ukraine's Cabinet of Ministers rejected a nominee to lead the economic crimes agency, drawing swift criticism from lawmakers and businesses over alleged interference in the selection process.

The agency, the Bureau of Economic Security, was created in 2021 to investigate economic crimes. It has since faced accusations of being used to pressure — and in some cases extort — businesses, prompting multiple calls and efforts to overhaul it.

Selecting a new director of the agency by the end of July is one of Ukraine's obligations to the EU and International Monetary Fund as part of international financing packages extended to the war-torn country by the institutions.

As part of a recent attempt to relaunch the bureau, Oleksandr Tsyvinsky on June 30 was officially nominated by the bureau's selection commission that consists of six members — three from the government and three international experts. Tsyvinsky is known for exposing schemes involving illegal land seizures in Kyiv..

But Ukraine's government on July 8 said it had rejected Tsyvinsky following alleged concerns raised by the country's intelligence service of potential Russian connections.

The government unanimously decided to ask the commission to submit two new candidates who meet all security requirements, the government press service wrote on its official Telegram channel, a move it claims aligns with the law.

Following Tsyvinsky's nomination, it was revealed that his father holds a Russian passport. He has said he hasn't spoken to his father, who lives in Russia, in years.

Tsyvinsky holds clearance for state secrets and has passed special vetting, backed by over 20 years in law enforcement, including nearly a decade at the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU).

Opposition lawmaker Yaroslav Zhelizniak, said the government had no grounds to reject a properly nominated candidate, claiming President Volodymyr Zelensky's office is behind the blocking of the nomination.

"The (bureau's) legislation provides no legal grounds for the cabinet to demand a new shortlist or impose additional, undefined requirements such as 'security criteria.' The term itself is absent from any statute and therefore has no legal force," Zhelizniak said.

"The SBU letter in this case is nothing more than an indicator of the winner's disloyalty to the President's Office and a desire to block the appointment," said Olena Shcherban, deputy executive director of the AntAC in a statement following the news.

Major business associations have called on Zelensky, Parliament Speaker Ruslan Stefanchuk, and Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal to reverse the government's decision.

The business groups warned that failing to reform the agency will harm investment decisions, particularly as Ukraine's wartime economy needs to attract capital.

"War is a time for radical changes in the rule of law and business climate, otherwise the economy cannot ensure the country's survival," the businesses wrote in an open letter.

‘Neither side wasted time’ — Ukraine’s economy minister on minerals deal negotiations with Trump’s ‘business-oriented’ administration

Ukraine’s Economy Minister Yuliia Svyrydenko says her task is simple — to get the investment fund behind the closely watched minerals deal with the U.S. off the ground, and prove its detractors wrong. “There are so many criticisms from different parties that this fund is just a piece of paper we can put on the shelves — that it won’t be operational,” Svyrydenko, who is also Ukraine’s first deputy prime minister, tells the Kyiv Independent at Ukraine’s Cabinet of Ministers on July 4, the morning

The Kyiv IndependentLiliane Bivings

Editor's note: This article was updated to include comments from Ukraine's Deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Chernyshov.

Deputy Prime Minister and National Unity Minister Oleksii Chernyshov will keep his position after a decision from the High Anti-Corruption Court on July 2, despite an ongoing corruption investigation.

Chernyshov is a suspect in a "large-scale" illegal land grab corruption case. After a court hearing on June 27, he was banned from traveling abroad without permission and slapped with a bail set at Hr 120 million ($2.9 million) while awaiting trial.

Despite Cheryshov’s defense appealing the bail, it was paid in full shortly after the July 2 hearing,  Olesya Chemerys, spokesperson for the High Anti-Corruption Court, told Ukrainian media Ukrainska Pravda. July 2 was the last day to pay the bail.

Prosecutors filed a motion for his removal on June 27. The day before, he told the Kyiv Independent that he denied the allegations and would not step down from his job.

"I definitely respect the court’s decision. At the same time, I will use all legal means to defend myself in court further and to protect my name and reputation," Chernyshov told the Kyiv Independent after the hearing on July 2.

Chernshov is the highest-ranking official in Ukrainian history to face such charges while in office, attracting a lot of eyes to the case. He is also considered a close ally of President Volodymyr Zelensky, marking a major accusation against the president’s inner circle.

Chernyshov has headed the National Unity Ministry since December, which was previously named the Reintegration of Temporarily Occupied territories Ministry, to strengthen ties with the Ukrainian diaspora. It was initially unclear why the ministry was created and what Chernyshov’s responsibilities were.

Earlier this week, several Ukrainian MPs, including lawmaker Yaroslav Zhelezniak, speculated that the ministry could be dismantled due to Chernyshov’s case.  Zhelezniak believes that the ministry is not needed and was created with the political goal of securing a position for Cherynshov, reported Radio Svoboda.

For now, Chernyshov says that the ministry will continue to operate as usual. "We have a lot of important work ahead, and stay dedicated to our values and tasks," he told the Kyiv Independent on July 2.

Speaking to reporters after the court dismissed the motion for his removal, Chernyshov said he had "collected funds" to pay the bail as his personal accounts are blocked.

The court’s decision to keep Cheryshov in place has raised concerns among the Anti-Corruption Action Center, a Kyiv-based watchdog. With Chernyshov still acting as deputy prime minister, he could potentially use his position to influence the court’s decision going forward in the case, said Olena Shcherban, deputy executive director at ANTAC.

"The logic of the court is currently completely unclear to me, as are the motives — but given the high profile of the position and Chernyshov being close to the president's entourage, I do not exclude that the court could be influenced," Shcherban told the Kyiv Independent.

"Whether this will affect the case is not yet known; it all depends on whether Chernyshov will still influence witnesses and use his position to save himself — and I think he will definitely use it," she added.

According to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) investigation, during his time as communities and territories minister in 2020-2022, Chernyshov and his associates undervalued land plots to benefit a developer in exchange for kickbacks.

Chernyshov and his accomplices allegedly received "significant" discounts on apartments in existing buildings, totaling over Hr 14.5 million ($346,000), from the developer. The actions cost Ukraine Hr 1 billion ($24 million), according to NABU.

Chernyshov first raised eyebrows after he left the country on a business trip days before law enforcement unveiled the charges and detained two of his close associates. Despite suspicions that he had fled the country to avoid arrest, he returned to Ukraine on June 22 and was summoned to NABU the following day.

During the court hearing, NABU and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) requested that Chernyshov be suspended from office and that the court set bail of Hr 120 million ($2.9 million).

The two offices also requested additional measures restricting his movements, including that he hand in his passport and wear an electronic monitoring device.

Top Russian defense official gets 13 years in graft crackdown

Authorities detained former Russian Deputy Defense Minister Timur Ivanov in April 2024 on bribery allegations, later adding embezzlement charges in October.

The Kyiv IndependentOlena Goncharova

Police aggressively dispersed protestors at an anti-government rally in Belgrade, whereover 100,000 demonstrators gathered on June 28 to demand snap elections.

The rally marks the latest mass action in a protest movement that started last fall, with activists calling for an end to corruption and the 12-year rule of Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic.

Crowds in Belgrade on June 28 chanted "We want elections!" — a key demand of the movement that Vucic has consistently refused. His term ends in 2027, which is also the date of the next scheduled parliamentary elections.

Police officers in riot gear used tear gas, pepper spray, and stun grenades to forcibly dispersed crowds, according to multiple media outlets. Dozens of protestors were detained, though the police did not provide an exat number.

Serbian Interior Minister Ivica Dacic claimed that demonstrators attacked the police.

Protestors reportedly threw eggs, plastic bottles, and other objects at riot officers blocking the crowd from entering a city park where Vucic supporters were staging a counterprotest. Vucic reportedly bused in groups of his own supporters from around the country ahead of the rally.

As protests engulf Serbia, President Vucic looks for support East and West

Editor’s Note: Following a number of attacks against peaceful protestors in Serbia, the Kyiv Independent agreed to not publish the last names of people who gave comments for this story. BELGRADE, Serbia — Thousands of protestors walked 300 kilometers on March 1 from Belgrade to the southern city of Nis to

The Kyiv IndependentCamilla Bell-Davies

Vucic, a right-wing populist leader with authoritarian tendencies and warm ties with Russia, has repeatedly accused foreign states of inciting the protests in order to topple his government. He is provided no evidence to support these claims.

The current wave of protests in Serbia began in November, when a train station roof in the town of Novi Sad collapsed, killing 15. The disaster was blamed on government corruption.

While Vucic has alleged that Western powers are trying to trigger a "Ukrainian-style revolution in Serbia," the Serbian protests are not markedly pro-Ukrainian or pro-Russian. Unlike mass demonstrations in Slovakia, where activists explicitly condemned the government's Kremlin-friendly agenda, the Serbian movement is focused on Vucic's corrupt leadership.

Since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Serbia has attempted to navigate a delicate diplomatic path between Moscow and the West. It has positioned itself as neutral in the Russia-Ukraine war and balanced its status as an EU candidate with its longstanding ties to Russia.

Vucic made his first official visit to Ukraine on June 11.

Ukraine’s new top prosecutor known for high-profile cases, seen as Zelensky loyalist

Loyalty to the incumbent administration has been the key requirement for prosecutor generals in Ukraine. Ruslan Kravchenko, who was appointed as prosecutor general on June 21, appears to be no exception. Previously he had been appointed as a military governor by President Volodymyr Zelensky and is seen as a presidential loyalist. Kravchenko became Ukraine’s top prosecutor after a lengthy hiatus during which the position of prosecutor general remained vacant. His predecessor, Andriy Kostin, r

The Kyiv IndependentOleg Sukhov

A former deputy mayor for Kharkiv is facing multiple charges related to creating and leading a scheme that allegedly embezzled 5.4 million hryvnias ($130,000) of budget funds allocated for fortifications, law enforcement agencies announced on June 28.

Ukraine's military as well as public officials has seen several corruption scandals since the start of Russia's full-scale war, related to illicit enrichment, money laundering, bribery, and misconduct of the command.

A total of four people, including two company heads and two entrepreneurs, were arrested alongside the former official, the National Police said.

The scheme allegedly involved a shell company procuring purchased materials for fortifications at prices over 30% above market value.

While authorities did not name the former official, Ukrainska Pravda reported, citing law enforcement sources, that the suspect in question is Andrii Rudenko, Kharkiv's Deputy Mayor for Housing and Communal Services between 2015 and 2024.

Authorities did not publicly release the identities of the remaining suspects.

The five suspects are currently facing charges under 17 articles of Ukraine's Criminal Code, with motions filed to impose pre-trial detention without bail.

It was not immediately clear as to the maximum sentence the suspects may receive if found guilty, however, Ukraine's Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko said that he will seek for "stolen budget funds must be fully returned to the state."

Law enforcement agents have previously arrested Kharkiv officials with corruption related charges.

In April, authorities charged a total of eight individuals, including local officials and entrepreneurs, accused of colluding with contractors to supply firewood to the military at prices significantly above market value. Several officials and entrepreneurs of housing and utilities departments in several regions, including Kharkiv, were allegedly implicated.

Ukrainian drone strike on Crimea air base destroys 3 Russian helicopters, SBU claims

The attack destroyed Mi-8, Mi-26 and Mi-28 attack helicopters, and a Pantsyr-S1 self-propelled anti-aircraft missile and gun system, the Security Service of Ukraine told the Kyiv Independent.

The Kyiv IndependentKateryna Denisova

Ukraine's National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) have filed a motion with the High Anti-Corruption Court seeking to impose bail and suspend Deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Chernyshov from office, NABU's press service reported on June 27.

Chernyshov was officially named a suspect on June 23 in what NABU called a "large-scale" illegal land grab case. Chernyshov heads the new National Unity Ministry in charge of returning refugees and is a close ally of President Volodymyr Zelensky. He left Ukraine days before law enforcement revealed a massive corruption scheme and detained two of his former close associates — Maksym Horbatiuk and Vasyl Volodin.

Investigators allege that Chernyshov and his associates undervalued the land fivefold, costing the state Hr 1 billion (about $24 million), and received discounted apartments worth over Hr 14.5 million ($346,000) in return. In a comment to the Kyiv Independent, Chernyshov has denied the allegations and said he has no plans to step down.

The agencies are requesting that Chernyshov be placed under a bail measure of Hr 120 million ($2.8 million) and be formally removed from his current post while the investigation proceeds.

The agencies said the proposed measures reflect the risks identified during the investigation, including concerns about potential obstruction of justice. They emphasized that their motion aligns with the court's precedent in similar high-profile corruption cases.

The motion also requests that Chernyshov be subject to standard obligations, including a travel ban, passport surrender, and mandatory cooperation with law enforcement. SAPO additionally urged that he be prohibited from contacting other suspects or witnesses in the case.

The agency noted that Chernyshov returned to Ukraine voluntarily and responded to their summons.

If the court upholds the request, Chernyshov would be required to pay the bail within five days. Failure to do so or breach of the imposed conditions could result in a more severe pre-trial measure, prosecutors said.

Chernyshov returned to Ukraine on June 22 following growing public pressure and reported to NABU the following day. Despite his claim that he had been on a scheduled business trip, critics accused him of attempting to evade charges.

Chernyshov is considered a close ally of Zelensky and has held several high-profile roles, including CEO of state-owned oil and gas giant Naftogaz.

Exclusive: Ukrainian deputy prime minister suspected of corruption says he won’t step down

Ukrainian minister and deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Chernyshov has been formally named a suspect in a high-profile illegal land grab case, becoming the highest-ranking official in Ukrainian history to face such charges.

The Kyiv IndependentDominic Culverwell

Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Chernyshov on June 23 was formally named a suspect in a high-profile illegal land grab case, becoming the highest-ranking official in Ukrainian history to face such charges while in office.

After reports and public speculation around Chernyshov's potential involvement, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) released a statement announcing that he was the sixth suspect in a “large-scale” corruption scheme led by a property developer from Kyiv who illegally claimed a land plot to build a residential complex.

In a comment to the Kyiv Independent, Chernyshov denied the accusations against him. "I'm absolutely not involved in that (scheme) — that's clear," he said.

He also said he won't step down from his post. "I will stay in this position," Chernyshov told the Kyiv Independent.

Chernyshov, who heads the new National Unity Ministry in charge of returning refugees, is a close ally of President Volodymyr Zelensky. He raised eyebrows in Ukraine after leaving the country days before law enforcement revealed a massive corruption scheme and detained two of his former close associates — Maksym Horbatiuk and Vasyl Volodin.

According to the anti-corruption agency, during his time as communities and territories minister in 2020-2022, Chernyshov and his associates undervalued land plots by five times to benefit the developer, which Ukrainian media identified as Serhii Kopystyra, allegedly costing the state Hr 1 billion ($24 million).

In exchange, NABU says the developer gave kickbacks to Chernyshov and his accomplices with "significant" discounts on apartments in his existing buildings, totaling over Hr 14.5 million ($346,000). Ukrainian news site Ukrainska Pravda reports this took place between 2021-2022.

NABU and Ukraine's Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) seized the plot to prevent the scheme. Most of the illegally obtained apartments have been seized.

Chernyshov arrived back in the country on June 22 after suspicions mounted in Ukraine that he was on the run and avoiding detention.

"I was definitely on a business trip and I was not escaping out of Ukraine," Chernyshov told the Kyiv Independent. "The rumors of me not returning are nothing but manipulation. I came exactly once my trip was over. I had a very intensive trip in Europe."

Chernyshov claims he was targeted by a "smear campaign" but said he didn't know who could be behind it.

He also said that he came back on his own accord and denied that anyone had asked him to return.

The minister arrived at the NABU offices on June 23, after the agency summoned him to be charged. Upon leaving the bureau, Chernyshov wrote on Facebook that he had a “constructive chat” with detectives and will cooperate with the organization.

An investigation into Chernyshov and two of his associates took place last year after suspicions arose, according to Ukrainska Pravda, with the agency obtaining a warrant to search Chernyshov's home.

But sources in anti-corruption agencies told Ukrainska Pravda that the head of NABU, Semen Kryvonos, blocked police searches due to his close relationship with Chernyshov, who was his boss when Kryvonos headed the State Architecture Inspection, an agency that was subordinated to Chernyshov's former ministry.

Searches allegedly took place a few weeks ago, after a one-year delay, according to Ukrainska Pravda.

Chernyshov said that while he knows Kryvonos in a professional manner, the two are not in contact. He added that the allegations against Horbatiuk and Volodin look "quite serious" but that it was for law enforcement to decide if their detention is justified.

He was appointed head of state-owned energy giant Naftogaz in 2022 after the dissolution of the Communities and Territories Development Ministry. He became the national unity minister in December 2024, a ministry created from scratch.

Chernyshov is widely believed to have a personal friendship with Zelensky. According to a report by Ukrainska Pravda, he was among only a handful of guests invited to celebrate Zelensky's birthday during the Covid-19 pandemic in 2021 — and the only member of the Cabinet of Ministers in attendance.

"The key thing is that today NABU and SAPO have actually reached the immediate circle of the president's 'family,'" Olena Shcherban, deputy executive director at the Anti-Corruption Action Center (ANTAC), a Kyiv-based watchdog, told the Kyiv Independent.

The President's Office feels the threat from NABU and SAPO and will likely attack the two institutions in response to Chernyshov's notice of suspicion, rather than "saving" the minister, Shcherban added.

"I am sure we will see both attempts to make harmful changes to the law and personal attacks on the SAPO head (Oleksandr Klymenko)," she said.  

Deputy PM Chernyshov returns to Ukraine as questions mount amid corruption probe

Deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Chernyshov returned to Ukraine on June 22 following his official trip abroad amid media speculations connecting Chernyshov’s absence to an ongoing corruption investigation.

The Kyiv IndependentDmytro Basmat

Deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Chernyshov returned to Ukraine on June 22 following his official trip abroad amid media speculations connecting Chernyshov's absence to an ongoing corruption investigation.

Chernyshov, who announced his return in a Facebook post, has been the subject of controversy in recent days after law enforcement agencies unveiled a corruption scheme involving two officials from the now-dissolved Communities and Territories Development Ministry, which was headed by Chernyshov.

Suspicions about Chernyshov, who heads the new National Unity Ministry focused on relations with refugees and the Ukrainian diaspora, arose when the deputy prime minister did not attend a Kyiv forum he himself organized in person but joined online from abroad.

Chernyshov unexpected work trip to Vienna, announced on June 16, came just three days after law enforcement officials revealed the scheme, leaving Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal to answer questions in parliament about Chernyshov's trip. The National Unity Ministry said that foreign trips are a regular part of Chernyshov's work.

Ukrainska Pravda reported, citing its sources, that Chernyshov's son and wife had also Ukraine following Chernyshov's most recent trip. It was not immediately clear whether they had returned to the country.

"Finally home. A difficult but very important business trip (which, thanks to some media outlets, became unexpectedly popular) is now over," Chernyshov said in a Facebook post.

Chernyshov added that he will be returning to work within the Cabinet of Ministers starting on June 23.

"We’ll also break down the smear campaign fact by fact. The truth always prevails," he added, referring to the ongoing police matter.

According to Ukrainska Pravda, Chernyshov and two of his associates came under investigation last year over suspicions that they received kickbacks from Serhii Kopystira, the head of the KSM Group, for illicitly transferring a plot of land for real estate development between 2021 and 2022.

Four sources in anti-corruption agencies told Ukrainska Pravda that despite the investigation, no police searches were conducted at the time, as they were blocked by the head of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, Semen Kryvonos, who has a long-standing relationship with Chernyshov.

After the dissolution of the Communities and Territories Development Ministry at the end of 2022, Chernyshov was appointed the head of the state-owned energy company Naftogaz. In 2024, the official was tasked with leading the new National Unity Ministry — a position that often involved travel abroad — while also being named deputy prime minister.

The other two people connected to the case — Maksym Horbatiuk and Vasyl Volodin — were reportedly detained last week as the investigation began moving forward.

President Volodymyr Zelensky previously commented on Chernyshov's presence abroad amid questions from media.

"What Shmyhal told me is that he’s on a business trip. He had two tasks from me, from the government, from all of us: the first — to open hubs in different countries, and the second — multiple citizenship. As far as I understand, he is working on both of these," Zelensky was quoted as saying.

The Kyiv Independent could not verify all the claims presented through the media investigation.

Ukraine war latest: ‘Ukrainian drones for the foot of every Russian soldier’ — Zelensky responds to Putin’s threat to conquer all of Ukraine

Key developments on June 21-22: * ‘Ukrainian drones for the foot of every Russian soldier’ — Zelensky responds to Putin’s threat to conquer all of Ukraine. * 3 killed, 14 wounded as Russia strikes Ukrainian military training facility. * Russia seeks to advance along almost entire eastern front, Ukraine holding ground in Kursk Oblast,

The Kyiv IndependentSonya Bandouil

Deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Chernyshov's official trip abroad has been approved until the end of the week, Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal said on June 20 amid media speculations connecting Chernyshov's absence to an ongoing corruption investigation.

Shmyhal made the comment in response to opposition lawmaker Iryna Herashchenko in parliament.

Suspicions about Chernyshov, who heads the new National Unity Ministry focused on relations with refugees and the Ukrainian diaspora, arose earlier this week when the deputy prime minister did not attend a Kyiv forum he himself organized in person but joined online from abroad.

The deputy prime minister's unexpected work trip to Vienna, announced on June 16, came three days after law enforcement agencies unveiled a corruption scheme involving two officials from the now-dissolved Communities and Territories Development Ministry, which was headed by Chernyshov.

According to Ukrainska Pravda, Chernyshov and two of his associates came under investigation last year over suspicions that they received kickbacks from Serhii Kopystira, the head of the KSM Group, for illicitly transferring a plot of land for real estate development between 2021 and 2022.

Four sources in anti-corruption agencies told Ukrainska Pravda that despite the investigation, no police searches were conducted at the time, as they were blocked by the head of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, Semen Kryvonos, who has a long-standing relationship with Chernyshov.

After the dissolution of the Communities and Territories Development Ministry at the end of 2022, Chernyshov was appointed the head of the state-owned energy company Naftogaz. In 2024, the official was tasked with leading the new National Unity Ministry — a position that often involved travel abroad — while also being named deputy prime minister.

The other two people connected to the case — Maksym Horbatiuk and Vasyl Volodin — were reportedly detained last week as the investigation began moving forward.

Chernyshov traveled to Prague on June 10 and 11 for a business trip, and then to Vienna a week later. The subsequent court hearings with the two detainees detailed Chernyshov's role in the corruption scheme, according to Ukrainska Pravda.

The news outlet stressed that there is currently no evidence that Chernyshov's current stay abroad is connected to the investigation. The National Unity Ministry said that foreign trips are a regular part of Chernyshov's work.

The Kyiv Independent could not verify all the claims and has reached out to Chernyshov's team for comment.

Trump’s peace push falters in both Ukraine and the Middle East — for similar reasons

U.S. President Donald Trump addressed a wide range of subjects during his inauguration speech. When speaking about international relations, he was adamant — “Our power will stop all wars and bring a new spirit of unity,” he said, talking about Russia’s war against Ukraine and the fighting in the Middle

The Kyiv IndependentOleg Sukhov