UKRAINE – President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s recent approval of a controversial law has caused outrage within Ukraine and has drawn harsh criticism from abroad. On 22 July 2025, Zelenskyy signed a parliamentary bill that puts the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) under tighter government control.
This move has sparked debate about the future of Ukraine’s anti-corruption fight and raised concerns about Zelenskyy’s leadership. Once embraced as a reformer who would root out corruption, Zelenskyy now faces sharp comparisons to Russian President Vladimir Putin for his firm grip on state power.
The new law, known as Bill 12414, was backed mainly by members of Zelenskyy’s party and passed through Ukraine’s parliament in record time. The legislation hands extra oversight of NABU and SAPO investigations to the prosecutor general, who has close ties to the president.
Both agencies were set up following the EuroMaidan Revolution in 2015 to fight corruption, free from political pressure. Their independence helped Ukraine show progress towards democracy and played a key role in pushing forward its hopes for EU membership.
Opposition parties and anti-corruption groups say the law destroys hard-won reforms. NABU’s director, Semen Kryvonos, argued that the “anti-corruption structure has been broken” and that the institutions set up to meet public demand after Euromaidan have been “smashed.”
Anastasiia Radina, who leads the parliamentary anti-corruption committee and has spoken out against her own party’s decision, said the new rules turn SAPO into “a funding fiction” unable to challenge powerful players.
The timing has also drawn suspicion. The day before the law passed, Ukraine’s security services raided NABU and SAPO, carrying out over 70 searches and accusing some staff of minor infractions or links to Russian agents.
Critics say these raids fit a pattern of using the security services to weaken, discredit and sideline those investigating people close to the president. Vitaliy Shabunin, a well-known campaigner, now faces charges of military service evasion and fraud, claims his supporters view as politically driven.
Zelenskyy’s Power Tightens Around the Presidency
Zelenskyy’s signature on Bill 12414 is part of a larger trend towards greater centralization of power in the executive. Since the Russian invasion in February 2022, martial law has been extended. Elections have been suspended, with the president staying on past the end of his official mandate on 20 May 2024.
While Ukraine’s constitution allows the president to serve beyond his term during wartime if no replacement is elected, the decision not to hold elections has sparked anger. Social media posts reflect growing discomfort, with users accusing Zelenskyy of clinging to power.
Critics point to other steps seen as curbing dissent. Zelenskyy merged all TV channels into one state-controlled broadcaster in 2022, which some claim reduced press freedom.
The government also banned the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, citing its ties to Russia. While supporters see this as a needed security measure, others believe it limits religious freedom. Kyiv’s mayor, Vitalii Klitschko, has openly accused Zelenskyy of centralizing control and undermining elected officials, warning that “Ukraine now stinks of authoritarianism.”
Political scientist Volodymyr Kulyk calls Zelenskyy’s approach “inclusionary populism,” using public anger against vague elites to strengthen his authority. Yet for many Ukrainians, the anti-corruption message rings hollow while the top levels of government face frequent corruption allegations.
Corruption Scandals Test Public Patience
Zelenskyy promised to tackle corruption during his 2019 campaign, a pledge welcomed by a public weary of state theft and misconduct. Yet a series of scandals has damaged his reputation.
In 2023, reports emerged of inflated military contracts, such as overpriced food supplies and shells, which led to the resignation of Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov. A senior advisor, Oleh Tatarov, was accused of bribery, though his case was shelved on technical grounds. The “Clean City” raids recently saw several staff linked to Kyiv’s mayor accused of corruption, deepening public mistrust.
A 2023 survey by the Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation found that 77 percent of Ukrainians blamed Zelenskyy for corruption in government and local military offices.
This view appears often on social media, where the president is accused of hypocrisy for failing to deliver real reform and reportedly punishing whistleblowers. Daria Kaleniuk of the Anti-Corruption Action Center told NBC News, “This is the red line which President Zelensky has crossed— and the red line is in a very wrong direction in terms of the development of Ukraine.”
By making NABU and SAPO answer to the prosecutor general, Zelenskyy’s administration gains more power to shelve or shut down cases against political insiders. Opposition MP Yaroslav Zheleznyak described the law as a “direct attack” on NABU’s autonomy and said it was drafted by the Cabinet or the National Security and Defence Council to dodge scrutiny by parliament.
Public Backlash Builds
The reaction among ordinary Ukrainians was immediate. On 22 July, crowds of people protested in Kyiv, Lviv, Dnipro and Odesa, braving martial law curfews to make their voices heard. These were the largest public protests since the 2022 invasion.
“We can’t let it backslide. We want honest government without corruption,” said Anastasia, a 21-year-old biology student in Kyiv. Stephan, a 23-year-old law student, called the demonstration “a clear sign we won’t accept corruption, even during martial law.”
The anger stands in stark contrast to the excitement of 2019, when Zelenskyy was elected with a huge majority, promising a clean break from the old system. Now, many feel let down by a leader they once trusted to bring change.
The European Union, a key backer of Ukraine, has also voiced strong concern. Marta Kos, the EU’s enlargement commissioner, warned the change was “a serious step back” for Ukraine’s EU membership ambitions. The price of Ukraine’s government bonds fell more than 2 percent on international markets after the law’s signing, reflecting wider doubts about stability.
Zelenskyy Echoes Putin’s Approach?
Comparisons between Zelenskyy and Putin, once dismissed as far-fetched, are now widely discussed. Both presidents now face accusations of using security concerns to justify power grabs, limit media, and sideline opposition. Unlike Putin’s brazen style—marked by flawed elections and harsh crackdowns—Zelenskyy’s centralization is less obvious but still draws concern from campaigners.
Vitaliy Shabunin, facing what he and others say are politically motivated cases, argues that Zelenskyy is moving Ukraine “toward corrupt authoritarianism.” The Financial Times recently reported rising concern among diplomats and campaigners that Zelenskyy uses emergency powers to reward loyalists and silence critics, putting Western support for Kyiv at risk. The EU and the United States stress the rule of law as a condition for aid.
With the country still fighting Russian forces, Ukraine now faces its most important test at home: defending the democratic hopes born from the 2014 EuroMaidan protests. Zelenskyy’s approval of Bill 12414 threatens those values and risks alienating many who have given up so much for a better future. The fresh protests show Ukrainians do not want to slip back into the corrupt, top-down rule of earlier times.
For Zelenskyy, the decision not to veto the bill—despite calls from reform advocates—has deepened public doubts. As one protester in Kyiv put it, “War has brought tragedy, but it should also be a chance to build a better country. We cannot go backwards.”
Whether Zelenskyy can win back support at home and from his international partners is still open. For now, the leader once praised as Ukraine’s “Churchill” risks going down as a ruler who, when faced with pressure and scandal, chose power over reform, making himself less different from his Russian counterpart than many had hoped.
