Bribes don’t wash away: Inside Zelensky’s squabble with Ukraine’s anti-corruption watchdogs

Доступно на русском

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) are two closely related structures, created in the mid-2010s as the result of demands from the International Monetary Fund and the European Commission.

Following the 2014 Maidan revolution, Western institutions made the fight against corruption a key condition for Ukraine’s European integration and access to international aid. The highest echelons of power in Kyiv were not excepted. The law establishing Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU), which came into effect in 2015, defines the agency’s primary mission as combating corruption and other criminal offenses committed by high-ranking officials, particularly those performing a national security function. The mission of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), also established in 2015, is to prepare charges based on NABU investigations and to prosecute cases in court.

From the very beginning, NABU was intended to operate independently from other security agencies. It is directly subordinate to the Cabinet of Ministers and is accountable to the Verkhovna Rada. The head of SAPO is appointed by the Prosecutor General but was intended to operate independently as well — with its own separate documentation system, dedicated government funding, and a legal ban preventing other prosecutors from interfering in anti-corruption cases.

But almost from the moment the new institutions appeared, the authorities have tried to limit their influence. Back in 2016, then-President Petro Poroshenko and members of his parliamentary faction introduced a draft law that would allow the Prosecutor General to dismiss the head of SAPO early while also giving regular prosecutors other levers of pressure on the organization.

But despite some early parliamentary support, the bill never came into force. After a harsh backlash from the European Union and the United States, the law was withdrawn — officially for revision and improvement — and never returned to the Verkhovna Rada. It is unclear why Poroshenko and his party put forward this initiative in the first place. What is clear, however, is that several individuals close to Ukraine’s fifth president, as well as commercial entities linked directly to him, were involved in investigations conducted by the anti-corruption agencies.

The NABU-SAPO partnership, operating independently from Ukraine’s law enforcement agencies, has demonstrated some successes. Investigators and prosecutors are handling hundreds of cases, and some have already resulted in convictions. Members of parliament, employees of the Security Services of Ukraine (SBU), and military officers are among those who have been put behind bars for violating the public trust.

Several cases are still pending, including those against a collection of high-ranking judges that includes former Supreme Court Chief Justice Vsevolod Kniaziev, who was dismissed from his post and even sent to pre-trial detention after being accused by NABU of accepting a bribe of nearly $3 million to issue a court ruling in the interests of a business entity.

After coming to power in 2019, Volodymyr Zelensky not only spoke warmly about the work of NABU and SAPO, but literally advertised them on social networks, calling on his fellow citizens to report all cases of corruption to the independent authorities. Just one month after the release of the video, Zelensky personally met with anti-corruption officials, assuring them that, “We will not interfere with your work… As the elected president, I want you to know that your hands are not tied.”

Zelensky may have first begun to resent the independence of the anti-corruption agencies in 2023, when NABU launched investigations into entities connected to Rostyslav Shurma, the overseer of the presidential office’s economic bloc. The Bureau began investigating the activities of energy companies associated with the civil servant’s brother, Oleh Shurma. After the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion, some of Oleh’s assets in the Zaporizhia region ended up under occupation and werecut off from the rest of Ukraine's energy system. Nevertheless, the companies received hundreds of millions of hryvnias from the state budget, allegedly for supplying energy to the national grid.

Investigators grew suspicious that Oleh Shurma — thanks to his brother’s political connections — might be involved in schemes allowing the companies to receive state funds for nonexistent electricity deliveries. As a result, in 2024, Rostyslav Shurma left the Presidential Office of his own accord, though the cases of companies associated with his brother are still under investigation. Since then, Rostyslav and Oleh have both moved to Germany.

Anti-corruption officials also turned their attention to relatives of another close Zelensky associate: Timur Mindich, a producer and co-owner of Kvartal 95, the entertainment empire founded by Volodymyr Zelensky before he became president. NABU became interested in the activities of Mindich’s cousin, Leonid, whom investigators allege was involved in a scheme to sell transformers to JSC «Kharkivoblenergo» — a regional energy company 65% owned by the state — at vastly inflated prices.

Information leaked to the press indicated that NABU was preparing to officially notify Timur Mindich of suspicions regarding his involvement in a financial crime. Shortly thereafter, the Kvartal 95 co-owner left Ukraine and relocated to Austria.

While unconfirmed rumors have circulated about what Zelensky himself might have been recorded as saying in conversations that NABU recorded after bugging Mindich’s apartment, it is no secret that the producer enjoyed access to the Presidential Office building. In addition, in 2021, at a moment when COVID-19 restrictions were still in force, photographic evidence suggests that Zelensky celebrated his birthday in the company of dozens of Kvartal 95 stalwarts at Mindich’s apartment.The Cabinet of Ministers was represented at the event by a single person: Oleksiy Chernyshov, who then held the post of Minister for the Development of Communities and Territories of Ukraine. Most likely, Chernyshev’s presence at the party, which was attended almost exclusively by people from Zelensky’s inner circle, means that he is also part of this circle.

But this fact did not help Chernyshov when NABU had questions for him. Investigators have reason to believe that Chernyshov and his subordinates participated in the illegal transfer of a state-owned plot of land, receiving a kickback from the developer in return. On the night of June 10-11 of this year, Chernyshov, who at that time held the posts of head of the Ministry of National Unity and deputy prime minister, went on an urgent foreign business trip. A few days later, NABU announced that two of his subordinates were suspected of involvement in corruption schemes. After that, Chernyshov delayed his return to Kyiv.

“I don’t see a future for myself in Ukraine,” the official reportedly said. Previously Chernyshov’s main responsibility as Minister for National Unity involved bringing back Ukrainians who had left the country.

The authorities fought desperately on Chernyshov’s behalf. Denys Shmyhal, who back in June still held the post of Prime Minister, spoke out against Chernyshov’s dismissal, and President Zelensky allegedly personally guaranteed the safety of the fugitive minister in the event of his return. The guarantees were backed up by officials from the Main Intelligence Directorate, who were sent to the border to meet Chernyshov — with the task of preventing his detention by NABU agents.

Chernyshev did return to the country and is now under investigation. He has been dismissed from the government, but he remains free thanks to a bail of 120 million hryvnia ($2.87 million), which was paid for him in part by businessmen who are formally not connected in any way with the ex-minister.

According to Ukrainska Pravda, citing its own sources within both the president’s inner circle and the government, the Presidential Office was deeply displeased with NABU’s investigations involving individuals close to Zelensky. The publication claims that representatives of the security forces were summoned to the Presidential Office and reprimanded for the lack of compromising information on NABU and SAPO employees. The security forces responded by investigating three accidents involving NABU employees that occurred back in 2021 and 2023. In addition, searches and detentions of NABU employees began as part of a new and much more high-profile case: the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) and the Prosecutor General's Office claimed to discover «Russian influence» in the work of NABU, and they set out to eliminate it.

Allegations that some NABU agents had ties to Russia — along with the SBU purportedly finding evidence of treason — served as the official pretext for the controversial law that stripped NABU and SAPO of their independence and placed them directly under the authority of the Prosecutor General’s Office. “The anti-corruption infrastructure will work — only without Russian influence,” the president claimed. ”Everything needs to be cleared of that. And there should be more justice.”

On July 22, the draft law was passed by a majority of lawmakers in the Verkhovna Rada. The votes in favor came primarily from lawmakers in the president’s Servant of the People party, along with members of the former pro-Russian Opposition Platform – For Life, which was banned after the full-scale invasion but managed to hastily re-brand itself as the Platform for Life and Peace. At the same time, a handful of votes for the controversial bill also came from members of the pro-European opposition — Petro Poroshenko’s European Solidarity, and Kira Rudik’s Holos — prompting accusations of political corruption and leading to calls for those lawmakers to resign their seats immediately.

Just a few hours after the vote, the document was signed by the president. It came into force the following day after being published in Holos Ukrainy, the official newspaper of the Verkhovna Rada.

The new law was met with fierce opposition, both from Ukrainian society and from Western allies. Faced with mass protests over the loss of independence for NABU and SAPO — and under heavy criticism from European partners — the authorities backed down, pledging to introduce new legislation in parliament that would restore the full independence of both agencies. The European Commission, for its part, stated that it does not see Russian influence in the Ukrainian government’s attempt to curtail the authority of the anti-corruption agencies.

“It is very important what society says. I respect the opinion of society. I think it's absolutely normal to react when people don't want something, when people don't like it. People said: ‘everything must be done according to the law.’ It was very important to me that we listened carefully and responded appropriately. We responded,” Volodymyr Zelensky said about the move to repeal the unpopular law, admitting that the follow-up action came in response to the mass protests the original law inspired.