Fresh Twist in PGO Scandal: Office Denies Kravchenko’s Claim of Suspicion Against NABU Head Kryvonos

A week after Ukraine’s Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko resigned amid allegations that a department head in his office protected fraudulent call centres, his own agency has called one of his recent statements untrue. The Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO) denied on 14 September that NABU director Semen Kryvonos had been served a notice of suspicion, directly contradicting what Kravchenko had posted hours earlier.

The denial, published by the PGO press service, states that “no person, including the head of an anti-corruption agency, has been served a notice of suspicion in accordance with the procedure established by the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. There are no legal grounds for doing so.” The agency added that the relevant entries in the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations had been cancelled. Source: Ukrainska Pravda, 14 September 2026

Kravchenko, who submitted his resignation on 7 September after initially saying he would not step down, had posted earlier on social media that the decision to serve the notice of suspicion had been “properly sent and confirmed by postal receipts.” He claimed that any attempt to cancel the entry would amount to “political and unlawful interference.” He also alleged that a NABU detective had visited the State Bureau of Investigation and the PGO to demand the cancellation “at any cost.” [Source: same article]

The contradiction raises fresh questions about Kravchenko’s conduct in his final days in office and about the independence of the NABU, which is investigating the PGO itself. The NABU is a key institution in Ukraine’s fight against graft, and any attempt—real or perceived—to move against its chief would have rattled Western partners who condition aid on anti-corruption progress.

The scandal erupted on 5 September when Ukrainian media reported that a department head in the PGO had organised ”protection“ for fraudulent call centres that scammed people across Europe. Source: Ukrainska Pravda, 5 September 2026 The next day, Kravchenko denied any personal involvement, ordered internal checks and also commented on a newly purchased house, a photo of a safe full of money, and his wife’s visa — details that fuelled public cynicism. Source: Ukrainska Pravda, 6 September 2026 and Source: Ukrainska Pravda, 6 September 2026

On 7 September, Kravchenko first told reporters he did not plan to resign, then later that day submitted his resignation letter. Parliament has not yet voted on it. Source: Ukrainska Pravda, 7 September 2026 and Source: Ukrainska Pravda, 7 September 2026

The latest episode — the denial of the NABU notice — suggests internal divisions within the PGO and an effort by the remaining leadership to distance itself from Kravchenko’s claims. The PGO statement did not name Kravchenko directly but made it clear that the information he circulated was “devoid of legal meaning.”

What this means strategically: Ukraine’s Western supporters have long demanded a clean break with Soviet-era prosecutorial culture. The PGO is historically resistant to reform, and the NABU — created under pressure from the International Monetary Fund and the EU — is supposed to be the main tool to go after high-level corruption. If the impression takes hold that a suspended PGO chief can still try to target the head of NABU without evidence, the political cost to Ukraine’s credibility will be high.

The internal checks Kravchenko ordered on 6 September are now likely to be carried out by his successor, whoever that may be. The open question remains who in the PGO was actually protecting the call centres — and whether they will face charges. No suspects have been named publicly yet.