On 3 September, Ukrenergo’s Supervisory Board dismissed the company’s CEO Volodymyr Kudrytskyi. This decision was made after the Russian shelling on 26 August, and the official reason given was a failure to protect energy facilities, which led to significant damage as a result of the Russian attack.
In contrast to the official version, which sounds quite plausible, commentators have expressed other opinions. For example, MP Yaroslav Zheleznyak believes the opposite: Ukrenergo are the only ones who have “properly built defences”. And the dismissal of Kudrytskyi is a traditional struggle for “flows”.
There is also a whole information campaign in defence of the ex-head of Ukrenergo. Its main argument is that a return to manual management of state-owned companies (after all, the Supervisory Board’s decision was made after President Zelenskyy voiced his belief that Kudrytskyi should leave at the position of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief) will not be liked by Ukrainian partners and investors abroad.
However, there are other versions. For example, energy expert Oleh Popenko expressed in his YouTube blog that Kudrytskyi was fired for making decisions in favour of private companies and removing Ukrenergo from state control.
“Formally, Kudrytskyi was fired for failing to prepare and protect substations from missile attacks. Informally, it is a loss of control over Ukrenergo. Actual economic decision-making in favour of foreign companies, partly in favour of DTEK. And the gradual withdrawal of Ukrenergo from state control,”
– says the expert.
Follow us on Telegram: the main news in a nutshell
As an illustration, he cites a similar story about Naftogaz, when, according to him, the company was withdrawing all its funds abroad under Kobolyov. A similar situation, according to some sources, has begun to develop at Ukrenergo, Popenko says.
He also disagrees with the rhetoric of Kudrytskyi’s defenders that any changes and reforms took place at Ukrenergo under his watch.
“There is not a single document, not a single proof that Kudrytskyi had any successes, that changes took place at Ukrenergo,” the expert says,
– says the expert and cites the case of United Energy as an example.
“What were the specific cases? This is the case of United Energy. They shipped electricity worth UAH 600 or 700 million, for which the company did not pay. Is it possible that this contract of this level could be implemented without the approval of the CEO? And then the company didn’t pay, and the bank guarantee turned out to be a half-baked one. In such a situation, I ask myself: what is the point of the reform?”
– popenko summarises.
The media and experts associate United Energy with oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky, as it used to supply electricity to his ferroalloy plants. The company is suspected of seizing electricity from NPC Ukrenergo worth over UAH 716 million in March 2022. According to the NABU, United Energy purchased electricity but did not pay for it, after which it sold it to other market participants and transferred the funds abroad. "Ukrenergo is trying to recover the debt through the courts. The NEURC fined United Energy UAH 1.7 million for violations in the electricity market.