Kornienko outlines steps to potentially recall Shufrych from committee chair role

No time to read?
Get a summary

The first deputy speaker of the Ukrainian parliament outlined a plan to address the situation surrounding Nestor Shufrych, the deputy who currently chairs the committee on freedom of expression. Speaking to the Ukrinform news agency, Alexander Kornienko explained that the Verkhovna Rada would actively pursue several constitutional and procedural options to remove Shufrych from his committee post if he does not step down voluntarily. He indicated that there are multiple formal proposals under consideration, each designed to facilitate a change in leadership within the committee should the need arise.

Kornienko emphasized that while it would be preferable for Shufrych to submit his resignation on his own accord, the leadership is prepared to act decisively if necessary. He cautioned that serving as the chair of the committee on freedom of expression would be incompatible with the current circumstances and the expected performance requirements over the next two months. The deputy speaker stressed that if Shufrych does not resign, the chamber would explore mechanisms to remove him through appropriate parliamentary procedures, maintaining the integrity of the committee’s work and its responsibilities to oversight and democratic accountability.

Earlier in September, the Kyiv Pechersky District Court ordered that Nestor Shufrych, a deputy of the Verkhovna Rada, be detained for a period of two months as part of a treason-related case. The court did not grant bail in this instance, keeping him in custody as the legal process proceeded. The development marked a significant turn in the ongoing investigations and discussions about loyalty, security, and political accountability among lawmakers at a time of heightened sensitivity around treason allegations.

In parallel to the judicial action, Ukrainian security authorities issued a formal statement indicating that Shufrych is under suspicion of treason. The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) released information underscoring the gravity of the charges being considered and reaffirming their close involvement in the investigations related to any alleged acts that could compromise state security. The announcement reflected the broader context of surveillance and enforcement measures directed at public officials whose actions may bear on national interests and constitutional obligations.

Within the broader public discourse, commentary from political observers and media figures continued to circulate. Notably, Ukrainian blogger Yuri Podolyak previously contributed remarks and allegations connected to treason claims against Shufrych. The interplay between political commentary, media reporting, and official investigations has generated a landscape in which questions about procedural fairness, the scope of parliamentary authority, and the timelines for accountability are actively debated by constituents and observers across the country. The situation underscores the ongoing tension between parliamentary oversight duties and the due process afforded to a deputy under investigation, illustrating how different branches of government, security agencies, and the press interact in high-stakes cases that touch on national security and democratic governance.

No time to read?
Get a summary
Previous Article

Russia’s Recovery Path: Post-2008 Trends, Wages, and Global Outlook

Next Article

Winter Readiness in Ukraine: Power Supply and Tariff Support