• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

SSU's Official Comment

Security Service of Ukraine

18:18, 2 September 2025

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office have notified SSU Brigadier General I.Vityuk of suspicion. The Security Service of Ukraine perceives such actions as a response to the justified detention by the SSU of several NABU employees at the end of July this year.

Recently, the SSU exposed one of the heads of the NABU's interregional departments on trading with russia (Article 111-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) and detained another employee of the Bureau for high treason and providing information to russia (Article 111 of the CCU).

The SSU believes that this announcement of suspicion against I.Vityuk is revenge on the part of the NABU and the SAPO for the fact that the Security Service is effectively countering russian influence on state agencies and has exposed several Bureau employees for committing crimes.

The suspicion against I.Vitiuk has been announced precisely after the high-profile arrests of the Bureau officials, although the relevant criminal proceeding was opened almost a year and a half ago. During this time, NABU and SAPO teams were unable to gather convincing evidence to confirm the illegal enrichment and false declarations incriminated to I.Vitiuk.

The reason for opening the criminal proceeding was the existence of an apartment owned by his family, allegedly purchased at an undervalued price with funds that were allegedly not obtained legally. At the same time, the investigation ignored:

• the conclusions of numerous expert examinations that refuted the purchase of the apartment at an undervalued price, including those initiated by NABU itself;
• the conclusion of the National Agency for Corruption Prevention, which, after conducting thorough checks, found no evidence of illegal enrichment in I. Vitiuk's family;
• the business activities of I. Vitiuk's wife and her receipt of legal and declared income, which was used to purchase housing for the family (confirmed by a number of state expert examinations);
• the testimony of numerous witnesses who, despite pressure from the investigation, refute the prosecution's version.

We would like to note separately that I.Vitiuk has been making an important contribution to the defence of the state since the first days of russia's full-scale invasion.

Under his leadership, the SSU Cyber Security Department repelled thousands of cyber-attacks on Ukrainian communications systems, energy and housing and communal services infrastructure. Dozens of complex counteroffensive operations have been carried out in cyberspace.

With the start of the full-scale invasion, Brigadier General I. Vitiuk stood up to defend Kyiv and headed one of the operational combat groups liberating Kyiv region from the occupiers. During 2024-2025, he was part of operational combat groups rotating in the combat zone in Sumy, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Mykolaiv and Donetsk regions. He took direct part in the Kursk operation.

Under Vitiuk's leadership, a combat unit was created on the basis of the SSU Cyber Security Department. The unit includes sniper groups and units that use drones to destroy not only the enemy's manpower and equipment, but also their electronic warfare and electronic reconnaissance equipment.

With the participation of Illia Vitiuk, work was established to document and neutralize enemy sabotage and reconnaissance groups, counteract psyops, and collect and analyze intelligence data. A Telegram bot, t.me/stop_russian_war_bot, was set up: through it Ukrainian troops received real-time information about the enemy's movements. This allowed the Defence Forces to destroy hundreds of pieces of russian military equipment, a large number of enemy personnel, including generals.

In view of the above, there is every reason to speak of selective justice on the part of NABU and SAPO towards the SSU officer.

For its part, in criminal proceedings involving NABU employees, the Security Service will continue to operate exclusively within the legal framework, relying on a solid evidence base and the norms of the law.

We would like to emphasize that membership of any state, law enforcement, security or anti-corruption structure does not grant any indulgences and is not a reason to evade responsibility.