Why Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Institutions Remain at Risk
By Suchita Uppal
Last week, Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) carried out searches targeting former National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) detectives now working at Ukrzaliznytsia, the state railway operator. Media linked the actions to their past investigations into corruption at state enterprises and government agencies, including the SBU itself. The SBU denied political motives, but the move is widely seen as the latest strike in an escalating campaign against Ukraine’s anti-corruption institutions
On July 22, 2025, Ukraine’s parliament passed a law handing sweeping control of the NABU and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) to the Prosecutor General’s Office — a move President Zelenskyy signed the same day. The backlash was immediate: in the first major protests since Russia’s full-scale invasion, demonstrators filled Kyiv, Lviv, Dnipro, Kharkiv, and other cities, chanting “Hands off NABU/SAPO” and warning the law would drag Ukraine’s anti-corruption progress backward. Under pressure from the streets and international partners, Zelenskyy introduced a reversal law, and within days the Verkhovna Rada voted 331–0 to restore the agencies’ independence. Human Rights First joined several civil society organisations in condemning the controversial law, and welcoming its reversal.
One day before the July 22 vote, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) had raided NABU in sweeping operations — more than 70 searches were conducted targeting over 15 staffers. Several of these were carried out without warrants and involved physical force. Senior detective Ruslan Magamedrasulov was detained on accusations of collaboration with Russian intelligence and illicit hemp trade with Dagestan. Undercover officer Viktor Husarov was also arrested and accused of links to a pro-Russian network. According to NABU, the raids seized operational data and ongoing case files, raising fears of compromised investigations. Civil society groups and journalists say the raids and arrests were calculated to intimidate investigators.
The reversal of the law, however, did not end the pressure. Both men remain under investigation. Magamedrasulov has been remanded in custody until at least late October. In September, a Kyiv court upheld Husarov’s detention. The offensive against NABU and SAPO has carried on.
NABU and SAPO have pursued cases against former Deputy Prime Minister Oleksii Chernyshov, ex–Presidential Office deputy Rostyslav Shurma, several Members of Parliament, and other well-connected figures. This reach into the president’s inner circle has only heightened the backlash.
This pattern of retaliation is not new. Human Rights First has tracked attacks on anti-corruption reformers in Ukraine for almost a decade. In 2017 we briefed the U.S. Helsinki Commission on attacks against reformers, later that year we reported from Kharkiv on assaults targeting activists, and in 2023 we co-authored a report on irregularities in reconstruction contracts. We continue to follow how Ukraine’s anti-corruption institutions are tested under war-time conditions.
SAPO head Oleksandr Klymenko say these assaults have “considerably slowed down [their] work.” Some whistleblowers have cut off cooperation and at least one detective has refused to pursue a sensitive case out of fear. Prosecutors describe a “toxic” atmosphere that has made investigations harder. One prosecutor reported they live in constant fear of being targeted by warrants “simply because [they] did [their] job.”
NABU director Semen Kryvonos similarly said his agency is battling a “dirty information campaign,” with detectives’ names leaked online alongside fabricated allegations. Officials within both agencies have also expressed fear that the next line of attack would be replacing their leadership.
Earlier this month, NABU detective Vitalii Tebekin was accused of failing to declare an Uzhhorod apartment. The court suspended him from NABU duties for 2 months and set his bail at UAH 2.9 million, a decision his defense and some civil society voices criticized as disproportionate.
Still, NABU and SAPO have pushed forward under fire. Within days of parliament’s reversal, they announced a drone-procurement graft scheme involving inflated contracts and kickbacks, naming a sitting MP and National Guard officers. Weeks later, SAPO indicted the SBU’s former cyber-security chief over a luxury apartment, while NABU detectives pressed a $300,000 extortion case against SBU officers. Even under raids and arrests, no investigation has been closed.
Ukraine should keep in mind that its EU bid depends heavily on the strength and independence of NABU and SAPO. Brussels has made clear that fighting corruption is a core condition of accession and weakening these institutions would put that path at risk.
