Ukraine’s Zelensky says ‘listened’ to protesters on anti-graft law

Above, protesters during a demonstration in Kyiv against a law that removes the independence of the NABU and SAPO anti-corruption agencies, on July 24, 2025. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 25 July 2025
Follow

Ukraine’s Zelensky says ‘listened’ to protesters on anti-graft law

  • The adoption of the bill, which curbed the powers of two anti-graft bodies, triggered the biggest public protests in Ukraine
  • Ukrainian leader acknowledged there should ‘probably have been more of a dialogue’ before the law was adopted

KYIV: Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky said his government had heard protesters opposing a law revoking the independence of anti-corruption agencies and had responded by proposing new legislation.

The adoption of the bill, which curbed the powers of two anti-graft bodies, triggered the biggest public protests in Ukraine since Russia’s invasion and drew criticism from Kyiv’s European allies.

“It is absolutely normal to react when people don’t want something or when they dislike something,” Zelensky said in comments released to journalists on Friday, adding it was “very important that we listened and responded adequately.”

“For me, it was very important that we listened and responded adequately,” Zelensky added.

The government has since submitted a bill aimed at restoring the independence of the anti-graft bodies – the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO).

It remains to be seen whether parliament, mostly loyal to Zelensky, will approve the draft law.

Zelensky acknowledged there should “probably have been more of a dialogue” before the law was adopted.

“I am focused on the issue of the war because right now, the number one issue in Ukraine is the war. The biggest problem is the war. The main enemy is Russia.”


US judge rejects Trump administration’s halt of wind energy permits

Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

US judge rejects Trump administration’s halt of wind energy permits

  • 17 Democratic-led states challenged the suspension
  • Offshore wind group supports ruling for economic and energy priorities
BOSTON: A federal judge on Monday struck down an order by US President Donald Trump’s administration to halt all federal approvals for new wind energy projects, saying that agencies’ efforts to implement his directive were unlawful and arbitrary.
Agencies including the US Departments of the Interior and Commerce and the Environmental Protection Agency have been implementing a directive to halt all new approvals needed for both onshore and offshore wind projects pending a review of leasing and permitting practices.
Siding with a group of 17 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, US District Judge Patti Saris in Boston said those agencies had failed to provide reasoned explanations for the actions they took to carry out the directive Trump issued on his first day back in office on January 20.
They could not lawfully under the Administrative Procedure Act indefinitely decline to review applications for permits, added Saris, who was appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat whose state led the legal challenge, called the ruling “a big victory in our fight to keep tackling the climate crisis” in a social media post.
White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said in a statement that Trump through his order had “unleashed America’s energy dominance to protect our economic and national security.”
Trump has sought to boost government support for fossil fuels and maximize output in the United States, the world’s top oil and gas producer, after campaigning for the presidency on the refrain of “drill, baby, drill.”
The states, led by New York, sued in May, after the Interior Department ordered Norway’s Equinor to halt construction on its Empire Wind offshore wind project off the coast of New York.
While the administration allowed work on Empire Wind to resume, the states say the broader pause on permitting and leasing continues to have harmful economic effects.
The states said the agencies implementing Trump’s order never said why they were abruptly changing longstanding policy supporting wind energy development.
Saris agreed, saying the policy “constitutes a change of course from decades of agencies issuing (or denying) permits related to wind energy projects.”
The defendants “candidly concede that the sole factor they considered in deciding to stop issuing permits was the President’s direction to do so,” Saris wrote.
An offshore wind energy trade group welcomed the ruling.
“Overturning the unlawful blanket halt to offshore wind permitting activities is needed to achieve our nation’s energy and economic priorities of bringing more power online quickly, improving grid reliability, and driving billions of new American steel manufacturing and shipbuilding investments,” Oceantic Network CEO Liz Burdock said in a statement.