The case of Volodymyr Kudrytskyi, former head of Ukrenergo, has provoked public outcry in Ukraine. He is accused of conspiracy to commit large-scale fraud related to tenders for the reconstruction of substations in 2018. Also involved is Lviv businessman Ihor Hrynkevych and representatives of private companies. Authorities claim Kudrytskyi conspired to misappropriate public funds. However, judicial review returned most funds, and there were no proven state losses.
Kudrytskyi was detained in Lviv region, then a court ordered him to be held in custody with bail set at over UAH 13 million. Three parliamentarians offered personal surety, but the court refused. Anonymous sponsors later paid his bail, releasing him with an electronic tag and a travel ban from Kyiv.
The case is led by Judge Kristyna Konstantynova, criticized for controversial judicial decisions on activists in the past. Experts and lawyers note procedural violations and lack of evidence for Kudrytskyi’s involvement. The process continues despite his key role modernizing Ukraine’s energy sector and attracting major international financial support.
Observers point to a systemic problem of selective governance in Ukraine, including in the State Bureau of Investigations (DBR), and suggest political motivation behind the prosecution. Other reformers, such as former ministers Andrii Pavlovarskyi and Andrii Koboliev, have faced similar pressure. The criticism targets both old law enforcement bodies and newly-formed anti-corruption institutions, which sometimes use prosecutorial tools in internal political conflicts.
The situation raises debate about the need for genuine reforms, an independent judiciary, and strengthening the rule of law in Ukraine. The key issue remains: Will Ukraine build transparent, independent institutions, or will selective governance continue to be used for political persecution and resource control?
