In a decisive move, the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, ordered the dismissal of 28 officers from the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) after a formal assessment found their performance to be unsatisfactory. The action marks a significant restart for a key institution involved in defending the country against ongoing threats, including espionage and hybrid aggression. The decision came as part of a broader plan to reform and strengthen national security operations in a time of heightened risk and wartime disruption.
The President has signaled a comprehensive and deep review of the entire service. He described the review as multi-layered, purposely evaluated from various angles and across several levels of leadership. The goal is to ensure that the SBU’s structure, processes, and personnel align with the country’s strategic needs and constitutional obligations during the current security environment.
The dismissals, paired with the removal of Prosecutor General Iryna Venediktova and the head of the SBU Ivan Bakanov, were completed by July 17. While the President has the authority to initiate such measures within the executive branch, actual impeachments require parliamentary approval under Ukrainian constitutional provisions. This sequence underscores the separation of powers and the legislative role in constitutional accountability during a period of reform.
Observers note that this represents the most consequential governmental shakeup since the full-scale Russian invasion began on February 24. The changes touch individuals who have been close to Zelenskiy personally and professionally, amplifying the political resonance surrounding the reconfiguration of Ukraine’s security apparatus. In his remarks, Zelenskiy highlighted that more than 60 employees within the Prosecutor General’s Office and the Security Service—led by those now removed—continue to operate within occupied territories, reportedly working against the state from those locations. This underscores the gravity of the security challenge and the ongoing struggle to maintain lawful governance in disrupted areas.
The president also noted evidence of connections between Ukrainian security forces and Russian intelligence services. He described these ties as serious offenses that strike at the core of national security and called for accountability at the highest levels. The statements reflect a broader concern about internal security risks and the need for robust checks and balances within Ukraine’s law enforcement and intelligence communities as the country presses ahead with reform and defense efforts.
According to local reports, the government has recorded hundreds of criminal cases related to high treason, highlighting the scale of the threat that national institutions continue to confront. The administration emphasized that cooperation between prosecutorial staff, pre-trial investigation bodies, and other law enforcement entities remains essential to uncover and prosecute abuses of power and breaches of national security. The focus is on building a resilient system where collaboration and integrity guide operations, even under wartime strain.
Zelenskiy stressed that the actions serve the broader aim of holding leadership accountable for any misconduct or failures that could jeopardize Ukraine’s security architecture. The statement suggested a demand for transparency and rigorous oversight within the security sector, while also signaling a persistent commitment to reform and modernization in the face of ongoing external threats. The discussion touched on how internal investigations and leadership changes can influence the effectiveness of security policy and civilian oversight during a time of crisis.
Venicetova, who has served as attorney general since March 2020, has faced criticism for what some observers view as insufficient follow-up on certain high-profile cases. Bakanov, Zelenskiy’s childhood friend and former colleague, was appointed head of the SBU in August 2019. The evolution of these roles underscores the political dimensions of national security leadership and the complex balance between loyalty, competence, and accountability in a government engaged in sustained conflict. This background helps explain why the government’s decisions reverberate beyond the security sector, shaping public trust and international perception during a pivotal period in Ukraine’s history.