Ukrainian parliament ousts prosecutor general amid corruption probe
The Ukrainian parliament voted unanimously to dismiss Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko as a corruption investigation into a criminal network protecting fraudulent call centers intensified.
On a unanimous parliamentary vote, 317 members approved the dismissal of Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko, with no opposition votes recorded. The decision follows a clash between Ukraine's anti-corruption bodies—NABU and SAPO—and the prosecutor's office, after the agencies initiated Operation "Carthage" to expose a vast network of illegal call centers that defrauded victims worldwide and laundered millions of dollars.
Evidence suggested the network was shielded from within the prosecutor's office. Kravchenko submitted his resignation and left for Paris to attend a conference on Ukrainian children, although his name does not appear on the event program. He also signed a decree to charge NABU director Semen Kryvonos, a step interpreted as an attempt to weaken the agencies' autonomy.
President Volodymyr Zelensky publicly called for Kravchenko's removal, and opposition lawmakers demanded a transparent, competitive selection process for the post. The interim holder of the prosecutor-general role has not yet been identified.
Why it matters
The ouster highlights a power struggle that could shape Ukraine's anti-corruption reforms and governance.
How the sides frame it
MODERATE AGREEMENTCenter coverage reports the parliamentary ouster as a unanimous vote tied to a clash over anti-corruption investigations, while right-leaning coverage frames the story around the former prosecutor’s accusations that anti-corruption officials abused a covert operation.
CENTER
Centrist coverage presents the dismissal as a unanimous parliamentary decision linked to a conflict between anti-corruption bodies and the prosecutor’s office, noting the prosecutor’s resignation and alleged attempt to weaken agency autonomy.
RIGHT
Right-leaning coverage emphasizes the former prosecutor’s allegations of misconduct by anti-corruption leaders, portraying the anti-corruption agencies as using a secret operation to seize evidence and influence proceedings.
The right emphasises
- Former prosecutor accuses NABU chief of misconduct
- Claims NABU and SZAP used a covert operation named Karthago to seize investigation materials
- Alleges monitoring of anti-corruption officials, their relatives and staff
In this story
Related stories
2 in this thread