Ukrainian authorities accuse Yulia Mendel of treason; she denies the accusation

Ukrainian authorities have accused Yulia Mendel, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's first press secretary, of treason, BTA reported, citing DPA. Mendel denies the accusation. The report rests on a single news agency reporting chain; Flank had found no independent confirmation at the time of publication. This is a developing story and further information may be added.

What the SBU and prosecutors allege

According to a statement by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), relayed by BTA, Mendel is conducting “information and sabotage activities against Ukraine”. The SBU and prosecutors allege that her statements damage the country's international reputation and justify the Kremlin and Russia's war.

Among the grounds cited by prosecutors is her interview with US commentator Tucker Carlson. According to the accusation as presented, her remarks have been used by Russian propaganda and are intended to create the impression that Ukraine does not deserve further support and that its leadership is obstructing peace. These are allegations by the institutions bringing the accusation, not facts established by a court.

24 Chasa and OFFNews also published the story. OFFNews also cites DPA, so the similar reports cannot be treated as separate, independent confirmations.

Mendel links the accusation to her criticism of Zelenskyy

24 Chasa quotes a Facebook post by Mendel in which she links the accusation to her statements to Western media and posts on social media. She says these concern corruption in Zelenskyy's inner circle, restrictions on freedom of expression and political persecution. This is her explanation for the authorities' actions, not an independently established motive.

In the quoted response, Mendel says the accusations are also based on the Carlson interview, as well as comments on X and Facebook.

According to BTA and 24 Chasa, she was Zelenskyy's press secretary in 2019–2021 and now lives abroad. Both outlets also report sanctions imposed on her in September, including a ten-year freeze on her Ukrainian assets.

What remains unclear

The exact date of the procedural action, the specific legal provision and the stage of the proceedings have not been established — including whether this involves a notice of suspicion or a subsequent step. Flank does not have the original statements from the SBU and prosecutors, the procedural document or the full recordings of the disputed statements.

The central question is whether the authorities are relying solely on public statements or also have evidence of coordination, funding or other links to Russian organisations. The use of someone's words by propaganda does not in itself prove such a link or criminal intent.

The case raises the question of where the line lies between criticism of the government during wartime and criminal assistance to the adversary. Drawing that distinction requires specific actions and evidence — neither the accusation of treason nor the claim of political persecution settles the question on its own.