On September 16, 2026, Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada passed Law No. 10190, which adds new articles to the Criminal Code criminalizing the operation of fraudulent call centers and the misuse of personal and financial data in electronic communications fraud. President Volodymyr Zelensky signed the law the same day. The legislation passed with 313 deputies voting in favor.

The law defines an electronic communications fraud group as three or more people who coordinate to steal property or property rights through deception using electronic communications, including the collection or use of personal, banking, payment, accounting, authentication, and other data. It introduces Article 190-1 (also referenced as Article 1901) on Electronic Communications Fraud, establishing liability for the illegal collection, storage, and use of sensitive information to unlawfully seize property. Article 255-4 (Article 2554) covers the creation and leadership of such organizations, and Article 255-5 (Article 2555) addresses recruitment into them.

Penalties range from three to five years for recruitment, or five to 10 years for repeat offenses; five to 10 years for regular participation; and seven to 12 years for organizing or leading a group, with a maximum of 12 years. Courts may also order property confiscation from those convicted.

The legislation follows an anti-corruption investigation into an alleged protection scheme within the Prosecutor General’s Office. Investigators allege that starting in mid-2025, officials accepted bribes from call centers in exchange for shielding their operations from law enforcement. The centers reportedly targeted victims in Ukraine and abroad. The National Anti-Corruption Bureau named five suspects, including a person described as a trusted associate and friend of Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko. Kravchenko denied protecting fraudulent call centers and has not been charged.

Parliament voted to dismiss Kravchenko on Monday; Zelensky signed the dismissal decree the same day. Kravchenko had left Ukraine the previous day. He later released a video message announcing suspicion notices against anti-graft officials, which were never officially served. Kravchenko cited political pressure for his resignation.

In July, Ukrainian cyber police dismantled a Kyiv-based call center alleged to have stolen more than $500,000 from dozens of Americans. The operation recruited English-speaking workers from the United States, West Africa, and European countries who posed as financial advisers and convinced victims to invest in fictitious assets. In mid-August, authorities conducted a nationwide crackdown involving 411 searches and the shutdown of 94 suspected fraudulent call centers in a single week.

Lawmakers stated that fraudulent activity has intensified under martial law, often involving phishing and deception to obtain sensitive information. The existing Article 190 on fraud was criticized for outdated terminology, such as references to electronic computing equipment, which hindered prosecution of modern organized schemes. The explanatory note accompanying the law says the updated framework aims to close legal gaps, enhance preventive measures, and improve prosecution of organized cybercrime, including financial pyramids.

Zelensky said the law is needed to help close Ukraine’s budget deficit and maintain national resilience during the ongoing war with Russia, and described it as part of broader judicial reforms to meet commitments to international partners.

Original Sources/Tags: kyivpost.com, kyivpost.com, europesays.com, kyivpost.com, 112.ua, europesays.com, unn.ua, sud.ua, (parliament), (ukraine), (deception)

The article reports that Ukraine's parliament passed a new law criminalizing scam call centers, with penalties up to 12 years in prison. It explains that the law defines these groups as at least three people coordinating fraud through electronic communications, using personal and financial data. The legislation follows an investigation revealing an alleged protection scheme involving Prosecutor General's Office officials who reportedly shielded scam centers and enabled money laundering. Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko resigned amid the scandal, citing political pressure, though he was not directly implicated. Parliament dismissed him on Tuesday. Three hundred thirteen lawmakers supported the new legislation.

The article provides no actionable steps for a normal reader. It does not explain how citizens can report scam operations, what resources exist for victims, or how to protect themselves from these schemes. There are no contact numbers, websites, or practical tools offered. The reader cannot use this information to take immediate action or make safer choices.

The educational value is limited. While the article states basic facts about the law and the scandal, it does not explain how scam call centers operate, why they are difficult to prosecute, or how protection schemes function within government systems. No statistics show the scale of the problem or the effectiveness of past efforts. The article does not help readers understand the broader context of corruption or cybercrime in Ukraine.

Personal relevance is minimal for most readers. The information primarily affects people in Ukraine or those who might encounter these specific scam operations. For readers elsewhere, the article offers little direct impact on their safety, finances, or daily decisions.

The public service function is weak. The article recounts events but provides no warnings, safety guidance, or emergency information. It does not tell readers how to recognize scam attempts or what to do if contacted by fraudsters.

No practical advice is given. The article does not offer steps readers can follow to protect themselves or help authorities.

The long-term impact is negligible. The article focuses on a single legislative event without connecting it to broader patterns or offering guidance for future vigilance.

The emotional impact is likely negative. The article describes corruption and fraud without providing constructive ways to respond, potentially leaving readers feeling helpless.

There is no clickbait language, but the article lacks substance beyond basic reporting.

The article misses opportunities to explain how scam operations work, how citizens can protect themselves, or how to report suspicious activity. It could have provided general guidance on recognizing fraud attempts or resources for victims.

Even without specific details, readers can apply universal principles. When encountering any suspicious communication, verify the source through independent channels before providing information. Be cautious of urgent requests for personal or financial data, especially from unknown parties. Keep records of suspicious contacts and report them to local authorities when possible. Stay informed through multiple credible sources rather than relying on single accounts. Trust instincts when something feels wrong, and take time to confirm before acting on pressure. These habits apply to any situation involving potential fraud or deception.

The text uses the phrase "uncovered an alleged protection scheme" which softens the accusation by calling it alleged. This makes the serious claim sound less certain and hides the full weight of the wrongdoing. The bias helps officials look less guilty by using a weak word. The word "alleged" pushes the reader to doubt even when facts are stated.

The text says "citing political pressure" when explaining why Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko resigned. This makes his exit sound like he was forced out for doing the right thing. The bias helps him look like a victim rather than someone caught in wrongdoing. The phrase hides that he may have been protecting himself from real consequences.

The text states "though the case did not directly implicate him" which makes it sound like he was clean. This hides that he was still part of the system that allowed the scheme. The bias helps him avoid blame even though he led the office involved. The wording makes readers think he was innocent when the text does not prove that.

The text uses passive voice in "suspicion notices against anti-graft officials, which were never officially served." This hides who was supposed to serve the notices and why they were not delivered. The bias makes the process look broken without saying who broke it. The passive voice hides the real actors behind the failure.

The text says "Parliament dismissed Kravchenko on Tuesday" using active voice that shows who acted. This makes the action clear and direct. The bias here is fair because it names the group responsible. The wording does not hide who made the decision.

The text calls the new article a way to "address organized electronic fraud operations" which sounds like a fair fix. This hides that the law only came after officials were caught protecting scam centers. The bias makes the government look reactive and clean when it was slow to act. The wording hides the delay and the cover-up.

The text says "Three hundred thirteen lawmakers supported the new legislation" which gives a big number to show strong agreement. This makes the law sound widely accepted and popular. The bias helps the government look united and right. The large number pushes readers to trust the law without asking harder questions.

The text describes the scheme as one that "shielded scam centers and enabled the laundering of millions of dollars" using strong words like shielded and enabled. These words make the officials sound like criminals on purpose. The bias helps paint them as evil and greedy. The strong language pushes the reader to feel anger without needing proof.

The text says protected individuals acquired "luxury real estate and expensive vehicles" which makes the corruption sound flashy and obvious. This helps the reader picture the greed clearly. The bias makes the wrongdoing feel personal and visible. The wording hides that the system allowed it for a long time.

The text ends by saying the legislation "aims to address organized electronic fraud operations that have drawn scrutiny for their ties to high-ranking officials." This makes the law sound like a bold move against power. The bias helps the government look brave and honest. The wording hides that the law came only after the scandal broke and that the system failed first.

The text carries a strong feeling of anger that comes from people who are upset about scam centers hurting others. This anger shows up in words like "criminalize" and "maximum prison sentence of 12 years." The feeling is very intense because lawmakers are taking hard action against bad people. The anger helps the reader see that the government is fighting back against fraud and protecting citizens.

A deep sense of worry appears when the text talks about officials being involved in a protection scheme. Words like "shielded scam centers" and "laundering of millions of dollars" show that people in charge may have helped criminals. This worry is strong because it means trusted leaders might be corrupt. The worry makes the reader concerned about whether justice can be trusted in Ukraine.

There is also a feeling of relief and hope when the text says parliament passed new laws. Phrases like "three hundred thirteen lawmakers supported" and "aims to address organized electronic fraud" show that good people are trying to fix the problem. This hope is moderate but clear, showing that change is possible. The hope helps the reader believe that Ukraine can overcome corruption.

A cold sense of justice appears when the text mentions the Prosecutor General resigning and being dismissed. Words like "resigned from his position" and "parliament dismissed" show that wrongdoing has consequences. This feeling is steady and helps the reader believe that no one is above the law, even high-ranking officials.

A subtle feeling of betrayal runs through the description of the protection scheme. The text says officials "shielded scam centers" and helped criminals get "luxury real estate and expensive vehicles." This betrayal is strong because it shows that people meant to protect the public instead helped criminals. The betrayal makes the reader feel that the legal system was broken from within.

These emotions work together to guide the reader's reaction in important ways. The anger and worry about corruption create sympathy for victims of scams and concern about government failure. The hope and relief about new laws inspire trust that Ukraine can fix its problems. The sense of justice and betrayal help the reader understand that this is not just about crime but about the integrity of the entire legal system.

The writer uses several tools to make these emotions stronger. Extreme language like "maximum prison sentence of 12 years" makes the punishment sound severe and final. Specific numbers such as "three hundred thirteen lawmakers" give weight to the support and make the action feel real and democratic. The naming of specific people like "Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko" adds credibility and makes the scandal feel concrete rather than abstract. The contrast between the new law and the old corruption creates a clear before-and-after picture that emphasizes progress. The repetition of words like "shielded" and "protection scheme" keeps the focus on the betrayal and makes it harder for readers to forget. These choices help steer the reader's attention toward both the seriousness of the problem and the determination to solve it, making the message feel both urgent and hopeful.