Ukraine's Parliament Votes to Dismiss Prosecutor General Kravchenko

Ukraine's parliament voted 317–0 on September 15 to dismiss Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko, who had resigned after anti-corruption agencies conducted searches related to alleged protection of fraudulent call centers. Before leaving for France, Kravchenko issued indictments against NABU Director Krivonos and others, prompting President Zelensky to submit the dismissal motion.

Quick Facts

Parliament voted to dismiss Kravchenko from office
Kravchenko resigned and left Ukraine
Anti-corruption operation targeting criminal organization in Prosecutor General's Office
Kravchenko issued indictment against NABU director
Searches conducted in Kravchenko's residence and office

⚡️317 нардепів проголосували ЗА звільнення Руслана Кравченка
Апостроф TV · YouTube
❗️317 голосів «за»: Рада ВІДПРАВИЛА генпрокурора КРАВЧЕНКА у ВІДСТАВКУ
Телеканал Конкурент Україна · YouTube
Ukraine’s parliament has approved the dismissal of Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko#Ukraine.
DV PORTAL · YouTube
MPA 7 AM News Update | September 15, 2026
MPATV · YouTube

Ukrainian parliament voted on September 15 to dismiss Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko, with 317 lawmakers in favor and none opposed. President Volodymyr Zelensky submitted the motion after Kravchenko announced on September 14 that he had issued an indictment against National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) Director Semyon Krivonos and would leave Ukraine on what he described as official business.

Kravchenko's dismissal followed an anti-corruption operation launched by NABU and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) on September 4. The operation targeted an alleged criminal organization within the Prosecutor General's Office, led by deputy department head Sergey Kropiva, which allegedly provided protection for fraudulent call centers and conducted money laundering. Searches were conducted at Kravchenko's residence and office, and a senior employee was arrested. On September 8, Kravchenko submitted his resignation, claiming he had been under political pressure.

On the morning of September 14, before leaving the country, Kravchenko signed an indictment against NABU Director Krivonos, alleging document forgery, unlawful receipt of benefits, and fictitious adoption. He also issued charges against an unnamed individual close to SAPO head Alexander Klymenko. Kravchenko characterized the anti-corruption operations as attacks on independent institutions and accused NABU and SAPO of attempting to usurp power. He claimed the operations aimed to access case materials against anti-corruption agency personnel.

NABU denied receiving any official charges from Kravchenko and stated it had not seized materials related to its employees during searches. The bureau characterized Kravchenko's actions as continuation of a systemic attack on its work. Kravchenko, currently in France, stated he was attending hearings at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe as part of an official trip, though Ukrainian media reported his name did not appear on the session speakers list.

Kravchenko had served as prosecutor general since June 2025, becoming Ukraine's youngest prosecutor general at age 35. He was the fourth prosecutor general appointed under Zelensky's presidency. Prior to his appointment, he had held positions including head of the Kyiv regional administration and director of the State Tax Service. The dismissal marks another episode in Ukraine's ongoing political tensions surrounding anti-corruption institutions.

Topics

Politics World Ukraine War

#political crisis #anti-corruption #dismissal #Kravchenko #NABU #Ukraine #Zelensky #Prosecutor General #fraud

Entities

Why This Matters

Kravchenko's dismissal follows a formal anti-corruption investigation into alleged protection of fraudulent call centers within the Prosecutor General's Office. The near-simultaneous issuance of charges against NABU Director Krivonos creates competing institutional narratives about institutional independence and abuse of prosecutorial authority. Ukraine's ability to enforce anti-corruption reforms and the independence of anti-corruption agencies (NABU and SAPO) depend on resolution of these allegations and institutional accountability structures. The episode reflects broader tensions over prosecutorial independence in Ukraine's governance.

Quick Facts

Related Insights

Topics

Entities

Why This Matters

Related Signals

Sources