Armed clash between SBU and HUR personnel in Kyiv leads to criminal cases and dismissals

Why it matters

The incident marks a rare open armed confrontation between two of Ukraine's main security agencies on the streets of the capital, and it has already produced criminal cases against named personnel in both the SBU and HUR. President Zelensky's public reaction and his decision to dismiss deputy heads of both services signal that the episode is being treated at the highest political level. The SBU's framing ties the clash to an alleged FSB-directed assassination plot against a Russian opposition figure, connecting a turf dispute inside Ukraine's security establishment to broader counter-intelligence work. Beyond the immediate casualties and charges, the affair raises questions about coordination between the services, command responsibility, and the political rivalry between the SBU and HUR leaderships.

What happened

On the evening of September 1 and the morning of September 2, two shooting incidents took place in Kyiv's Berezniaky residential area (Dnipro district), with police closing off Yurii Shumskoho Street. The clashes involved personnel of the SBU and HUR and were linked to the disputed detention of Stepan Kaplunov, deputy combat commander of the Russian Volunteer Corps, a unit subordinated to HUR's 'Tymur' special unit. Three HUR servicemen were wounded — one lightly, two in moderate condition — and were hospitalized.

According to RDK commander Denys Kapustin, the first shots came around 23:00 on September 1 when SBU representatives tried to enter Kaplunov's apartment for a search, and a second escalation began around 08:00 on September 2. Kapustin said SBU personnel opened fire, shooting at the legs rather than to kill, and that HUR did not return fire. The SBU, by contrast, said an armed group attacked its investigative-operational team during urgent investigative actions in a terrorism case organized by Russian special services, and that its Alfa special unit used weapons against those resisting.

On September 3, Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko announced that two suspects had been served with suspicion notices: SBU officer Nazar Verkhola, under Part 2 of Article 365 of the Criminal Code (excess of authority by a law enforcement officer), punishable by 3 to 8 years; and HUR serviceman Serhiy Ivanov, commander of a HUR squad, under Article 348 (encroachment on the life of a law enforcement officer), punishable by 9 to 15 years or life imprisonment. On September 4, the Pechersk District Court in Kyiv released both suspects under personal obligations; prosecutors had requested detention with bail of about 1 million UAH. Ivanov's surety was Zaur Malakshenidze, commander of the military unit to which he belongs; Verkhola's surety was the head of the SBU Counterintelligence Department. Both hearings were held in closed session at the prosecutor's request.

President Zelensky called the incident "absolutely shameful," announced that deputy heads of both the SBU and HUR responsible for the situation would be dismissed, and on September 3 signed a decree dismissing Oleh Khramov, head of the SBU Department for State Secrets Protection and Licensing. Head of the President's Office Kyrylo Budanov called for a "thorough and impartial" investigation and said the DBR and the Office of the Prosecutor General were handling it.

The DBR opened pretrial investigations into both the armed clash and the dissemination of SBU officers' personal data. Former MP Ihor Mosiychuk, who is under NSDC sanctions for pro-Russian propaganda, published data he said belonged to three SBU 5th Directorate of Counterintelligence (DKR) officers detained after the shooting. Bloggers Ihor Lachenkov and Serhiy Sternenko alleged the data was leaked by a DBR employee on the order of DBR director Oleksiy Sukhachov; DBR officially denied any transfer of data to the Russian side and called the allegations a deliberate attempt to discredit the bureau.

The underlying dispute is the August 23 detention of Kaplunov. RDK and Kaplunov describe it as an abduction by people posing as police, followed by nine days in custody, shackling and psychological pressure to extract a confession of FSB contacts. The SBU characterizes the same events as a detention operation in which Kaplunov cooperated and admitted contacts with the FSB. The SBU publicly stated on September 3 that Kaplunov was preparing an assassination in Kyiv of a Russian opposition figure arriving for Independence Day — media cited by Babel linked the alleged target to Akhmed Zakayev, head of the government of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria in exile — and was also tasked with killing several Ukrainian Defense Forces servicemen for payment; sources in Zakayev's circle said they learned of the plot only from media.

How Ukrainian sources describe it

Ukrainian coverage centers on the institutional confrontation between the SBU and HUR and frames the episode primarily as an internal security-agency rivalry. Political analyst Volodymyr Fesenko is widely cited for the view that the clash reflects personal and political confrontation between SBU head Oleksandr Poklad and HUR/President's Office head Kyrylo Budanov, and he characterized the situation as a "fighting draw." Ukrainian outlets give extensive space to RDK commander Denys Kapustin's account — that SBU representatives opened fire, shot at the legs, and that HUR did not return fire — and to Kaplunov's claim that he was abducted and pressured into a false confession. The narrative presents the case against Kaplunov as an attempt to discredit the 'Tymur' special unit and Budanov. Ukrainian coverage also highlights the data-leak allegations against DBR, noting that Mosiychuk — under NSDC sanctions for pro-Russian propaganda — was the recipient, framing the dispute as part of an information war against HUR. The court hearings on preventive measures for Ivanov and Verkhola, and the gap between the prosecutor's requested detention and the court's choice of personal obligation, receive detailed procedural attention.

Where reporting differs

Sources disagree on who opened fire in the morning shooting on September 2. RDK commander Denys Kapustin says SBU representatives opened fire, shooting at the legs without aiming to kill, and that HUR did not return fire; the SBU states that an armed group attacked its investigative-operational team during urgent investigative actions and that its Alfa special unit used weapons against those resisting. The two sides also disagree on who initiated the physical confrontation: the SBU's version, cited by defense lawyer Taras Borovsky, is that HUR serviceman Serhiy Ivanov attacked first, while Kapustin holds that SBU forces were the aggressors.

Sources also disagree on the nature of Kaplunov's August 23 detention. RDK and Kaplunov describe it as an abduction involving persons posing as police, shackling, and psychological pressure to extract a confession of FSB contacts; the SBU frames it as a counter-terrorism detention operation in which Kaplunov cooperated and admitted the contacts.

On the alleged data leak, bloggers Ihor Lachenkov and Serhiy Sternenko accused DBR of transferring SBU officers' personal data to former MP Ihor Mosiychuk on the alleged order of director Oleksiy Sukhachov; DBR officially denied the transfer and called the allegations a deliberate attempt at discreditation.

Finally, sources differ on the reality of the alleged FSB assassination plot. The SBU says it uncovered a plot against a Russian opposition figure arriving in Ukraine for Independence Day, with media linking the target to Akhmed Zakayev; sources in Zakayev's circle told media they only learned of the plot from reporting, and Kaplunov denies the underlying charges.

Background

The Russian Volunteer Corps (RDK) is subordinated to HUR's 'Tymur' special unit. On September 1, RDK chief of staff Oleksandr Fortuna publicly reported that Kaplunov had been kidnapped; the SBU later acknowledged it was responsible for his detention on August 23 and characterized it as a lawful operation rather than an abduction. The SBU claims Kaplunov admitted contacts with the FSB and was tasked with preparing the assassination in Kyiv of a Russian opposition figure (media cited by Babel linked the target to Akhmed Zakayev) and the killing of Ukrainian Defense Forces servicemen for payment. Kaplunov denies the accusations and says his admission was coerced. HUR publicly framed a subsequent wave of leaks about SBU officers as a targeted disinformation campaign against it.