Operation Carthage: the dismissal of two SBU employees is a confirmed personnel response, but it does not answer every allegation connected to the investigation.
On November 4, SBU chief Oleksandr Poklad dismissed two senior service officials who had become subjects of a NABU investigation. The decision was reported by the SBU, Ukrainska Pravda and Ukrinform. The service said it would assist necessary procedural actions and expected a transparent, objective and impartial investigation.
That is significant, but limited. The dismissals show that the SBU made an immediate staffing decision after the anti-corruption case became public. They do not establish who committed a crime, verify every episode described by investigators, or replace judicial review.
NABU and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office say Operation Carthage uncovered an organisation that allegedly made systematic payments to senior law-enforcement officials in exchange for the uninterrupted operation of fraudulent call centres and other illegal businesses. The anti-corruption bodies say the network may have coordinated at least 52 call centres, and they also allege links to drug sales, counterfeit goods, currency forgery and violent crimes. Those are investigative allegations, not court findings.
Separately, Ukrainska Pravda, citing law-enforcement sources, reported that NABU detained SBU General Serhii Duka. The outlet also reported searches involving SBU officials. The supplied material does not include a full response from Duka, other named subjects, or their legal representatives.
The strongest reason not to treat the personnel move as proof of guilt is straightforward: the SBU says it is cooperating with the investigation, while criminal responsibility must be determined through due process and the courts. The value of the dismissals is therefore not a final answer, but a verifiable institutional signal that an internal response has begun.
The next question is concrete: will investigators and the SBU disclose, without compromising the pre-trial inquiry, what internal decisions enabled any alleged protection scheme and what safeguards will prevent comparable links from recurring?
Sources
- Українська правда · Source date: 2026-11-04
- Укрінформ · Source date: 2026-11-04
- Українська правда · Source date: 2026-11-04
- Українська правда · Source date: 2026-11-04
Independent editorial content. WUA is not affiliated with any political party. 2026-11-04