Zelensky’s decree removing Prosecutor General Kravchenko has no legal consequences — expert

Vasily Vovk explained that martial law does not mean the president gains additional powers.

On the eve, President Volodymyr Zelensky dismissed from office Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko, who after being featured on NABU tapes decided to counterattack the director of the Bureau, Semen Kryvonos, and left Ukraine. However, the corresponding presidential decree has no legal consequences, says expert on state legal security and Major General of Justice Vasyl Vovk in a column for Censor.NET.

“Decree No. 905/2026 of 14 September 2026 year on the removal of Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko is legally invalid,” notes Vovk.

According to him, if the decree does not reference a provision of the Constitution of Ukraine, then at its core it is already unconstitutional. At the same time, Vovk noted that among the constitutional powers of the president there are no:

the right to remove from office anyone who did not appoint that person, even if this was done directly by the head of state;

the right to appoint a temporary acting head in any body or institution, be it the Prosecutor General’s Office, the SBU, the State Bureau of Investigation, the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, etc.

The president, as the expert argues, can independently, without a vote of the Verkhovna Rada, dismiss those whom he appointed, for example, to the National Bank of Ukraine Council or the National Council on TV and Radio Broadcasting. After all, the powers to dismiss from these bodies are clearly provided by the Constitution.

“But even in these cases, he does not have the power to carry out an act of dismissal that is not provided for by the Constitution of Ukraine,” the expert adds.

In his decree on the removal of Kravchenko, Zelensky refers to Article 64 of the Constitution on martial law. Vovk notes that this article provides that under martial law certain rights and freedoms may be restricted with specify the duration of such restrictions. However, the expert emphasizes, the Constitution of Ukraine does not provide that the president, during martial law, obtains additional powers.

“In light of the above, the decree on removing Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko cannot have any legal consequences. They would be possible only after the Verkhovna Rada gives consent to the dismissal of Kravchenko and the issuance of the corresponding presidential decree,” Vovk stated.

He stressed that the Constitution of Ukraine has the highest legal force, and its norms are norms of direct action.

Recall that in the morning 14 September Kravchenko stated that he signed a suspicion for NABU director Semen Kryvonos. According to him, Kryvonos forged documents to obtain a bribe and “artificially” adopted a child to have reasons to avoid accountability in court. Kravchenko also said that the operation “Carthage,” involving officials of the OGP, was organized so that detectives could seize materials of criminal proceedings against the heads and employees of the anti-corruption bodies.

During the night 14 September the prosecutor general left Ukraine for a foreign assignment, as he himself said. The Civil Procedure Code believes that an official could not do this without the president’s permission. Meanwhile, Volodymyr Zelensky himself publicly reacted to the prosecutor general’s decision, stating that Kravchenko has only one way — dismissal. As a result, today the Verkhovna Rada will vote on it. Also, in NABU Kravchenko’s suspicion was reacted to, noting that pressure on anti-corruption bodies, which began last year, continues.

In the article “Test for Zelensky. Will he change the rules for appointing the prosecutor general after Kravchenko’s resignation,” Olena Shcherban, head of the legal department at the Center for Countering Corruption, explained why the next appointment of the head of the OGP will be a test for the president.