KYIV
ANGELINA, 25, holds her cardboard tight and paints the letters carefully: “Repeal law no. 12414. We need a real transparent Ukraine.” Nearby, her friend Svitlana has finished writing hers: “My dad did not give his life for this mess. Make Ukraine free from corruption.”
Since July 23, emotional protests led by young people have rocked the war-torn country’s major cities. They held up cardboard placards―hundreds of them―filling the square before the Ivan Franko Theatre in Kyiv. It is a place close enough to the presidential office that President Volodymyr Zelensky could watch them from his window. This was an important change: the traditional choice for protests is Maidan Nezalezhnosti or Independence Square, which lies a bit farther away.
Who are these activists defying martial law, risking themselves? Many describe themselves as innocent young people with dreams of a free and prosperous Ukraine. Some say they are at the beck and call of certain forces. A deeper look reveals that most of them are teenagers or those in their mid-20s, with strong opinions and views. This is the generation formed in the crucible of war, having grown up amid the howl of sirens and devastation of missiles.
The cardboard placards were handmade and raw, and some slogans bordered on the edge of decency. Some used vulgar slurs and abuses, reflecting the non-conformism and insolence of the youth. The slurs put off many parliamentary politicians, who avoided joining the agitation or aligning with it. This marked the “Cardboard Revolution” as a unique grassroots protest not orchestrated by any organised political group.
The reason behind all this: on July 22, Zelensky signed decree no. 12414 into law, stripping two key anti-corruption bodies of their independence―the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutors Office (SAP). It made them subservient to the prosecutor general’s office. Set up in 2015 as an executive body with special status, NABU engages in detecting, preventing and investigating cases of corruption.
Now, why did Ukraine need these anti-corruption bodies? First, it was an offshoot of the Revolution of Dignity of 2013. Second, it has a direct relation with Ukraine’s future accession to the European Union and visa-free travel for the Ukrainians. Taking away the independence of these bodies―which enjoy solid international support―will have far-reaching implications that could jeopardise the architecture of western aid for Ukraine.
Questions have been raised about the performance of these bodies, and they form the raison d’être of law no. 12414. After signing the law hastily the same day it was passed by parliament, Zelensky said the bodies were ineffective and that they would now function without “Russian influence”.
“Cases which are pending should be investigated,” Zelensky said. “For years, office-holders who fled Ukraine are comfortably living abroad―without any legal liability. This is not normal. There is no rational explanation why criminal lawsuits involving billions in embezzlement are hanging fire.”
But if Zelensky had first initiated a discussion on the performance of the anti-corruption bodies―and not just hastily passed a law―the protests could have been averted. Many activists think that it is essential to audit these bodies and change their leadership.
NABU, for its part, has often pointed fingers at Ukraine’s unreformed judiciary as the reason for stalled prosecutions. An audit of NABU, which was carried out for the first time in a decade, found its performance to be moderately effective.
Earlier this year, NABU brought charges against more than ten MPs from the president’s own party and three ministers, including a deputy prime minister. From June until the law’s passing in July, Ukraine’s internal security agency conducted nearly 80 searches targeting NABU, SAP and affiliated individuals, accusing them of being under “Russian influence”.
No sooner had the ink on the signed law dried than the protests erupted. Demonstrations spanned the country―from Kyiv, Lviv and Odesa to the frontline cities of Kharkiv, Sumy and Dnipro, despite continuous drone and missile strikes.
In this backdrop, any internal discontent jeopardising Ukraine’s EU integration has the potential to escalate to a full-blown upheaval disintegrating the country. The 2013 Maidan revolution started because the then president Viktor Yanukovych did not sign the EU association agreement and the memories are still fresh. Of course, 2025 is not 2013, and everyone agrees that Zelensky is no Yanukovych. He has managed to steer his great country through terrible times of the pandemic and the war.
Realising the political, international and security risks therein, Zelensky responded like a mature politician. He paid heed to the protesters and, on July 24, announced his decision to present a new law, reinstating the independence of the anti-corruption bodies. “We heard what people are saying these days, to each other and on the streets. These are not in vain,” he said.
On the same day, Yulia Svyrydenko, the newly appointed prime minister, met ambassadors and international partners to explain the steps Zelensky and the government will take to protect the independence of the anti-corruption bodies. Zelensky, for now, seems to be happy with submitting a new draft bill, which is scheduled to be considered on July 31. It remains to be seen whether he would overhaul the independent bodies. The protesters are waiting to return on July 31 to ensure that all ends well.
Such seemingly anarchic protests in Ukraine are a regular affair. With deep, centuries-old roots, they are innately Ukrainian. Most importantly, they are fully nonviolent, something rare in most protests even in peaceful, developed democracies.
The author, formerly with the UN, is a professor of international relations at the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy.