2 powerful Ukrainian agencies are fighting in the open. Both say only Russia is to win
SBU Head Vasyl Malyuk attends the 'Ukraine Year 2024' forum in Kyiv, Ukraine on Feb. 25, 2024. (Viacheslav Ratynskyi/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Ukraine's Security Service (SBU) and the country's top anti-corruption agency are entangled in an escalating confrontation involving raids and arrests.
The conflict is seen as part of a broader struggle between the President's Office and the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU), which says the authorities are trying to eliminate its independence.
The SBU, which is seen as loyal to the President's Office, has arrested NABU employees, accusing them of having ties to Russia, and portrayed the crackdown as an attempt to counteract Moscow's alleged influence on the bureau.
But anti-corruption activists see it as an effort to stop the detectives who have investigated President Volodymyr Zelensky's inner circle from doing their job.
What began as a wave of raids has since spiraled into a tit-for-tat campaign, with each agency now investigating operatives within the other.
In conversations with the Kyiv Independent, top officials from both agencies have tried to make a case for their side of the story, while claiming that they are willing to find a way out of the fight.
Both mentioned that the public standoff between the agencies has only one beneficiary — Russia. When pressed, they said that the President's Office is also interested in the continuation of the conflict.
Although protests and pressure from Brussels stopped the recent attempt to undercut the NABU, no one appears to believe the President’s Office has abandoned the idea.
The primary case
The conflict began in July, when Zelensky signed a law that subordinated the NABU to the prosecutor general, an official appointed by the president. The bureau's independence was later restored following the first major protests during the all-out war, but the clash continued.
A day before the law was signed, the SBU searched NABU premises and detained Ruslan Mahamedrasulov, the head of a NABU detective unit, and his father, Sentyabr, charging them with "aiding the aggressor state" — Russia.
This case became central in the ongoing clash between the two agencies.
The SBU's critics say that Mahamedrasulov was targeted because he has gone after Zelensky allies. SBU officials who spoke with the Kyiv Independent have brushed off these allegations.
Mahamedrasulov had a minor role in a NABU corruption investigation against Zelensky's business partner Timur Mindich, a film producer and co-owner of the president's Kvartal 95 production company, according to a source in the bureau who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The SBU suspects Mahamedrasulov and his father of maintaining contacts with Russia and planning to serve as intermediaries in cannabis sales to the Russian republic of Dagestan.
The key controversy is that the audio recording at the center of the case is of poor quality. The SBU's critics and Mahamedrasulov's interlocutor in the recording argue that Uzbekistan, not Dagestan, is mentioned in the tape.
Mahamedrasulov's defense, the Anti-Corruption Action Center, argues that there have been several due process violations and even torture in the case. A key witness claims to have been threatened by the Security Service.
The Prosecutor General's Office and the SBU denied the accusations.
Yaroslav Zheleznyak, a lawmaker from the Holos opposition party and another supporter of Mahamedrasulov, has stated that the evidence against the NABU detective was falsified, pointing to numerous discrepancies.
Daria Kaleniuk, executive director of the Anti-Corruption Action Center, argued that the case "is simply personal revenge against a detective who dared to do his job and investigate the president's friends."
"The goal is to intimidate the NABU through a show trial and a crackdown on Mahamedrasulov and his father," she added.
Olena Shcherban, an expert at the Anti-Corruption Action Center, is a defense attorney for Mahamedrasulov.
The Security Service argues that there is a solid case against Mahamedrasulov and that it is up to the court to rule on his guilt.
In July, the SBU also detained another NABU detective, Vitaly Husarov, and charged him with high treason.
A tit-for-tat struggle
Following the initial raids, both law enforcement agencies have been actively working against one another.
The National Anti-Corruption Bureau on Sept. 2 charged Illia Vitiuk, former head of the SBU's cybersecurity, with illicit enrichment and lying in his asset declaration.
The Security Service responded on Sept. 10 by charging Vitaly Tebekin, a NABU detective, with lying in his asset declaration.
On Sept. 25, the SBU searched the property of Taras Likunov, a former NABU detective and brother of Mahamedrasulov's defense attorney Shcherban.
Likunov is accused of getting a job at the state-owned railway monopoly after investigating it as a detective, which would constitute a conflict of interest, according to Ukrainian legislation.
A secret operation
The most dramatic development in the confrontation between the country's Security Service and the National Anti-Corruption Bureau was the mysterious return and detention of Fedir Khrystenko, a fugitive pro-Russian lawmaker charged with treason, on Sept. 6.
How Khrystenko ended up in Ukraine remains unclear.
Khrystenko, who had lived in Dubai, was neither extradited nor deported. According to Kyiv Independent sources in Ukraine's law enforcement, Security Service Deputy Head Oleksandr Poklad had visited Dubai ahead of Khrystenko's return to Ukraine.
The sources also said that negotiations to secretly return a fugitive from the United Arab Emirates could not have been conducted without the President's Office's direct involvement.
The Prosecutor General's Office told the Kyiv Independent that Khrystenko had arrived in Ukraine voluntarily and had been detained by the SBU. The office did not elaborate on his motivation.
Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko authorized the Security Service's July raids against the NABU and publicly sided with the SBU.
According to Security Service officials who spoke with the Kyiv Independent on condition of anonymity, Khrystenko is set to testify on a wide range of cases, some of which involve the NABU.
The SBU claimed in July that Khrystenko had been in contact with Mahamedrasulov and another NABU detective, which hints at their connection to Russia, according to the SBU. The NABU denied the accusations.
Meanwhile, allegations of Russian influence have been poisoning the Security Service as well.
General Serhiy Duka, deputy head of a key SBU department, has allegedly overseen the crackdown on the NABU. He is also now fighting accusations of having ties to Russia.
The parents of Duka’s wife have received Russian passports and traveled to Russia during the full-scale invasion, according to the Anti-Corruption Action Center.
The SBU called the watchdog's investigation "biased" and said Duka had informed his employer about the relatives' situation.
No happy ending
Activists and lawmakers see the Security Service cases against the bureau's employees as part of the authorities' attempts to destroy the independence of anti-corruption institutions.
"All of this has a negative impact on the NABU and its ability to remain independent," Kaleniuk said.
Behind closed doors, the Security Service and the National Anti-Corruption Bureau agree that the public confrontation benefits neither agency.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, officials from both sides blame the President's Office for the current developments.
