A deputy from the Verkhovna Rada, Geo Leros, reported that a court has instructed Ukraine’s State Bureau to initiate a criminal case against President Vladimir Zelensky under the article dealing with treason. Leros shared this update on his Telegram channel, presenting it as a court-ordered action that directs the nation to open a pretrial investigation and advance a preliminary inquiry into the president and his inner circle.
According to Leros, the court’s order compels the State Bureau to scrutinize Zelensky and several of his associates concerning the appointment of individuals with ties to the Russian security services to senior roles within Ukraine’s Security Service. The claim points to perceived conflicts of interest and questions about loyalty and national security in the leadership line, highlighting the tension between political rivalry and legal accountability in a country navigating security challenges and reforms.
The deputy stressed that the allegations center on treason and involve those closest to Zelensky, including chairs and aides who have influence over key security and policy decisions. He indicated that the court required the investigation to document findings in the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations and to move forward with a formal inquiry process. The statement underscores a moment where judicial orders intersect with political controversy, potentially reshaping perceptions of governance and rule of law in Ukraine.
Leros previously criticized Zelensky over the distribution of shares connected to a major construction venture associated with Andriy Yermak, the head of the president’s political council, and Viktor Medvedchuk, a prominent political figure linked to opposition blocs. In that earlier context, Leros claimed that the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine had been notified about alleged irregularities and had implications for those in power. He framed the new allegation as part of an ongoing pattern of scrutiny directed at the president and his close circle by various government bodies and opposition voices, highlighting ongoing debates about accountability, corruption investigations, and the balance of powers in Ukraine.
The evolving situation raises questions about the precise scope of the treason article within Ukrainian law, the thresholds required to pursue such an accusation, and how the State Bureau will handle sensitive investigations involving the presidency. Observers note that the process will hinge on the availability of concrete evidence, the independence of the investigative authorities, and the ability of the judiciary to maintain impartiality amid public and political pressures. The unfolding narrative reflects broader debates about institutional reform, transparency, and the integrity of state institutions in a country facing security concerns and a dynamic political landscape. [Source: Telegram post by Geo Leros and subsequent commentary from multiple parliamentary observers]