Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Business

Cabinet of Ministers prematurely ended Shurma’s mandate on Naftogaz’s supervisory board — what it means for energy security

The state representative on the board stepped down at his own request amid a plan to renew management. This is not just a personnel decision — it's a signal to the market, oversight systems and international partners.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

December 30, 2025 · 3 min read

Cabinet of Ministers prematurely ended Shurma’s mandate on Naftogaz’s supervisory board — what it means for energy security

What happened

The Cabinet of Ministers has prematurely terminated the powers of supervisory board member of NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine, Rostyslav Shurma. According to the government’s press service, Shurma represented the state on the board, and his powers were terminated in connection with a submitted resignation.

"His powers were terminated in connection with a submitted resignation."

— Press Service of the Cabinet of Ministers

Context: management renewal and board composition

On 18 November the government announced a competition for seats on the supervisory board as part of a plan to renew the management of state-owned companies in the energy sector. The current board’s contracts expire in January 2026, so the renewal process continues alongside the board’s ongoing duties.

The supervisory board consists of seven people: four independent members and three state representatives. It is currently chaired by Anthony Marino; independent members include Tor Martin Anfinnsen (former vice president of Equinor), Richard Hookway (33 years at British Petroleum) and Ludo van der Heyden (professor at INSEAD). State representatives remain Nataliya Boiko and Kostyantyn Maryevych.

Also, on 28 April 2025 the supervisory board elected Serhiy Koretsky as chairman of the management board; he has held the position since 14 May. On 10 June the Cabinet updated Naftogaz’s charter and the regulations on the supervisory board — the board now formally approves strategy, investment and financial plans and has influence over leadership appointments.

Cases and reputation

Rostyslav Shurma is a former deputy head of the Presidential Office for economic affairs, dismissed in September 2024. In April 2023 journalists from Bihus.Info reported that solar power plants in the occupied territories, allegedly linked to his circle, received payments under the "green tariff" until the summer of 2023 despite a possible lack of connection to Ukraine’s united power system. Shurma called the investigation "manipulative and untrue."

In September 2024 the National Anti‑Corruption Bureau opened a criminal case regarding payments for electricity generated in the occupied territories. In July 2025 German law enforcement, together with NABU detectives, carried out searches at Shurma’s rented estate near Munich.

"I do not have the status of a suspect or accused; all companies in which my brother is a shareholder operate in accordance with the law."

— Rostyslav Shurma, former deputy head of the Presidential Office for economic affairs

Why this matters

This decision has long-term consequences not only for individuals — it affects the corporate governance of a key energy player, investor confidence and the effectiveness of oversight of critical infrastructure. The situation with investigations and international investigative actions increases scrutiny on transparency and compliance with international standards.

Experts note that personnel changes at Naftogaz should take place through open procedures and with consideration of risks to energy security and the company’s financial stability.

What’s next

The government now needs to promptly and transparently fill the vacant state representative seat and complete the competition for the other positions to ensure the board’s decision‑making transparency until the contracts expire in January 2026. If the investigations produce new findings, legal clarity will be required — both for officials and for the market.

Can the Cabinet turn these personnel changes into proof of renewed transparency and reliability for Ukraine’s partners? The answer will determine not only Naftogaz’s reputation but also the level of trust in the management of critical infrastructure during wartime.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026