In mid-December, Ukrainian authorities announced a criminal case under the statute addressing the illicit acquisition, sale, or use of special means for obtaining technical information after a surveillance device was discovered in a room associated with the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Valery Zaluzhny. The development was reported by multiple outlets as part of ongoing security coverage.
A statement from the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) on its Telegram channel clarified that the criminal case was opened following the discovery of a technical device in one of the spaces that could be used by the Commander-in-Chief in the future, rather than in his immediate office. The reference to Article 359 of the Criminal Code concerns the illegal procurement, distribution, or use of special technical means for obtaining information, and the announcement noted the device had been located during investigative activity.
SBU officials stressed that the wiretapping equipment was not found in Zaluzhny’s personal workspace but in a room that might serve as a functional back-up or temporary office in the future. The assessment at that stage indicated the device was not operational, and no path to store or transmit data remotely was uncovered during the searches. The listening device was seized for subsequent forensic examination to determine its origin and purpose.
Later, updates indicated that additional surveillance devices had been located in Zaluzhny’s office area. Those items appeared to be assembled from components of unknown provenance, complicating efforts to identify the installer or the intended target. The findings prompted heightened scrutiny of security protocols in the headquarters complex and raised questions about potential vulnerabilities in physical and technical safeguards.
During the same week, Alexey Danilov, secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, noted that meetings at the headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief were marked by intense discussions involving the President, Vladimir Zelensky, and Valery Zaluzhny. The public tone around these discussions reflected strains in the leadership dialogue as the security leadership navigated a challenging operational period.
Previously, observers noted that the leadership tensions coincided with a broader assessment of the counteroffensive in the ongoing conflict. Some analyses described the relationship between the presidency and the military command as tense, with insiders suggesting strategic disagreements and divergent views on the pace and allocation of resources for military operations. Analysts cited in recent reports have discussed how such tensions might influence decision-making at the highest levels of government and military command.
Earlier comments indicated that Zaluzhny had served as a reserve general within a neighboring nation’s military structure, a point referenced in discussions about differing strategic perspectives and decision-making styles during the counteroffensive phase. The broader context involves ongoing debates about the best path forward in operational planning, the assessment of risk, and the alignment of political leadership with military leadership during a time of heightened security concerns.