PROFILE: Kateryna Lykhohliad — the 425th Regiment Journalist Soldiers Called an Enemy

Introduction: two months of investigation, a filmed threat, and a dossier that burns

Babel, the 425th Regiment, and 25 non-combat deaths

In June 2026, journalist Kateryna Lykhohliad of the Ukrainian investigative outlet Babel published the results of two months of investigation into the 425th Assault Regiment Skelia — the largest assault unit in the Ukrainian military. Her investigation documented 25 non-combat deaths within the regiment since its founding. These were not deaths at the front. These were soldiers who died under circumstances their families and comrades attribute to conditions imposed within the unit's structure — and that official documents allegedly recorded under benign medical diagnoses.

The response did not come in the form of an institutional denial or an official correction request. It came from a soldier in the regiment, Mykola Kharkhan, who on June 25, 2026 published a video naming Lykhohliad as a "media killer" and accusing Babel of acting in the interest of the aggressor. The video spread. The State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) opened a criminal case. And the Skelia regiment found itself at the center of a debate that extends far beyond its boundaries: can you investigate the Ukrainian military in wartime without being accused of treason?

Who is Kateryna Lykhohliad — an investigative journalist in a high-risk zone

Kateryna Lykhohliad works for Babel, an independent Ukrainian outlet known for its in-depth investigations since its founding in 2018. Her work on the 425th Regiment illustrates a particularly difficult form of journalism in wartime: investigating institutional failures inside an army that the nation overwhelmingly supports and whose public image is protected by a culture of collective silence born from existential threat. This is the kind of work that, in other contexts, wins prizes. In Ukraine in 2026, it earns a filmed threat posted to social media.

The profile of Lykhohliad in this story is that of a journalist who did the work that the military justice system had not done: gathering testimony from families, cross-referencing official statements with available medical records, identifying victims by name and the circumstances of their deaths. It is factual work. And it is precisely this factual work that triggered a response — a soldier using a public video to designate her as an enemy.

The named victims — three men, three stories, one common denominator

Volodymyr Tsukanov, Vitalii Karat, Dmytro Koval — the names behind the numbers

Babel's investigation does not stop at 25 anonymous deaths. It names victims. Volodymyr Tsukanov, 32. Vitalii Karat, 38. Dmytro Koval, 50. These three men are documented with forensic evidence: fractured ribs, blunt thoracic trauma officially recorded as pneumonia in their military files. This gap between the documented physical injury and the official diagnosis is at the core of what the investigation exposes — not simple medical negligence, but potentially a deliberate documentation effort to erase evidence.

What these three names represent — beyond their individual cases — is the possibility that Lykhohliad's investigation is not the product of journalistic exaggeration but of documented fact. The forensic evidence cited by Babel has a particular quality: it does not rest on testimony alone, but on medical documents that contradict the official diagnoses. This type of material evidence is what makes the investigation difficult to simply dismiss.

The conditions described — mined perimeters, isolation cells, bound recruits

Babel's investigation describes the conditions inside the 425th Regiment in terms that, if verified, represent serious violations of Ukrainian military law. Mined perimeters preventing soldiers from leaving their positions. Isolation cells where recruits allegedly shared space with patients undergoing drug withdrawal. Soldiers bound as a disciplinary measure. If these facts are accurate — and that is what the SBI investigation must determine — they describe an environment where institutional brutality replaced lawful military discipline.

These conditions, if confirmed, help explain why the 425th Regiment leads the ranking of complaints filed with Ukraine's military ombudsman: 5.1% of total national ombudsman complaints for a single unit. That figure — cited by Babel and Euromaidanpress — is a statistical anomaly that merits serious investigation regardless of any wartime context. A unit that concentrates 5.1% of all national complaints is not a unit with a few marginal problems.

Mykola Kharkhan's threat — one video, two criminal code articles, one precedent

June 25: when a soldier becomes a uniformed censor

On June 25, 2026, Mykola Kharkhan, a soldier in the 425th Regiment, published a video on social media. In it, he named Kateryna Lykhohliad as a "media killer" and accused Babel of acting "in the interest of the aggressor." This phrasing is not incidental in Ukraine's legal context: accusing a journalist of acting for the enemy in wartime is a designation that can expose the targeted person to risks ranging from intimidation to criminal prosecution for collaboration or high treason.

The coalition that formed in response to the video demanded charges against Kharkhan under two articles of the Ukrainian criminal code. Article 345-1 covers threats against journalists. Article 171 covers obstruction of journalistic work. These demands are not symbolic — they establish a legal framework in which Kharkhan's video is a criminal offense, not a protected opinion under military freedom of expression.

The commander suspended — a late but real institutional response

The institutional response to the Skelia case was slow — but it happened. The commander of the 425th Regiment was suspended from his duties pending the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) inquiry. A criminal investigation was officially opened into the 25 documented deaths. These two measures — suspension and investigation — constitute an implicit acknowledgment that the case presented by Babel deserves serious examination and cannot be dismissed out of hand.

This institutional response is necessary but insufficient. A suspension is not a conviction. An opened investigation is not a concluded one. The well-documented risk in comparable contexts is that procedures drag on long enough for public attention to shift, for evidence to become inaccessible, and for those responsible to quietly return to their posts or be transferred to other units. That is the scenario that press freedom organizations and victims' families are working to prevent through sustained public pressure.

The 425th Regiment in the context of Ukraine's manpower crisis

200,000 deserters — the figures of an army under strain

To understand the context of the Skelia case, you have to look at the manpower crisis running through the Ukrainian military since 2024. The number of soldiers in unauthorized absence (AWOL) is estimated at approximately 200,000 — a figure that reflects the exhaustion of a fighting force engaged for more than four years in an intense war of attrition, with insufficient rotation and reduced leave. This manpower pressure creates perverse institutional incentives: holding soldiers in place by force where motivation is lacking, filling human deficits with insufficiently trained recruits, maintaining order through methods that exceed the legal framework.

The 425th Regiment — like many Ukrainian assault units — operates under this maximum pressure. That does not justify what Babel's investigation documents. But it partially explains it. The documented behaviors — mined perimeters to prevent desertions, brutal disciplinary measures — are illegal responses to a real problem: how do you maintain the cohesion and manpower levels of a unit in a war of this intensity? The right answer is rotation, training, psychological support. The wrong answer is institutional brutality. The Skelia regiment apparently chose the wrong one.

Syrskyi withdraws training rights — Skelia excluded from the measure

In June 2026, Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi withdrew basic training rights from 8 units of the Ukrainian military — a measure penalizing failures in recruit training and treatment practices. This decision shows that the Ukrainian high command is aware of the systemic problem and is beginning to address it institutionally. It is a significant measure that deserves recognition.

But the 425th Regiment Skelia does not appear on the list of those 8 sanctioned units. This fact — Skelia's absence from Syrskyi's disciplinary list despite its anomalous complaint rate and the 25 documented deaths — is a point that critics and victims' families have raised. It creates a legitimate question: why is a unit that concentrates 5.1% of national complaints not included in the announced institutional disciplinary measures? That is a question the SBI investigation will also need to address.

The victims' families — impossible grief inside an opaque system

Relatives facing an official explanation vacuum

For the families of Volodymyr Tsukanov, Vitalii Karat, and Dmytro Koval, Babel's investigation is not abstract. These are their sons, their brothers, their husbands. They received bodies bearing injuries that official certificates did not explain. Fractured ribs recorded as pneumonia. Blunt trauma classified under benign medical categories. For them, Lykhohliad's report is not a news article — it is the first articulated answer to questions they had been asking for months without any institutional response.

The institutional silence in the face of families' questions is one of the most damning elements of the case. An army that asks families to sacrifice their loved ones owes them at minimum an honest explanation when those loved ones die in non-combat circumstances. This moral contract — implicit in any bond between a soldier and their institution — was broken in the case of the families documented by Babel. That is what the SBI investigation will also need to address: not only individual criminal responsibility, but the debt of truth owed to families who are still waiting.

The collective dimension — soldiers who dare not speak

Babel's investigation rests on testimony — soldiers currently serving or recently demobilized who agreed to speak. Obtaining that testimony in a military context, in wartime, under the institutional pressure it involves, is difficult and risky investigative work. The fact that soldiers agreed to testify — even anonymously in some cases — suggests that the problems documented in the 425th Regiment extend beyond the named individual cases and reflect a collectively lived reality.

But for every soldier who testified, how many did not dare? Kharkhan's video designating Lykhohliad as an enemy sent a clear message to those still hesitating: speaking against the institution is betraying the institution. This deterrent pressure is one of the main reasons institutional military failures are so difficult to document — and why Babel's work is all the more significant for having gathered the necessary testimony despite it.

Press freedom in wartime — the price of bearing witness

The dangerous precedent of a filmed threat not immediately sanctioned

Mykola Kharkhan's video poses a problem that goes beyond the Lykhohliad case alone. If a soldier can publish a video designating a journalist as an enemy of Ukraine without immediate consequences, it sets a precedent. Other journalists investigating military failures receive the message: document the military's problems and you risk being labeled a traitor. That message, in a country at war where the designation of "enemy" is not abstract but potentially lethal, is a form of censorship through intimidation.

Ukraine positions itself as a democracy fighting for its values against an authoritarian regime. This posture requires internal consistency: journalists who document institutional failures must be protected, not targeted. Ukraine's international credibility — and therefore its diplomatic and military support — depends in part on demonstrating that its civilian and military institutions operate to democratic standards. Protected investigative journalism is one of those standards.

Press freedom organizations and international pressure

International press freedom organizations — Reporters Without Borders, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), the Institute of Mass Information (IMI) — are following the Lykhohliad case. Their attention is itself a form of protection: governments that care about their international image are sensitive to this type of oversight. For Ukraine, which depends on Western support, that sensitivity is real.

The coalition that demanded prosecution of Kharkhan includes Ukrainian journalists, civil rights organizations, and civil society representatives. This coalition is visible and structured. It will maintain sustained pressure for the case to move forward — whether toward prosecution of Kharkhan, toward a conclusion of the SBI investigation into the deaths, or both. The case is not about to disappear from the public agenda.

The role of Ukrainian civil society — the pressure that keeps the case alive

The coalition demanding accountability — journalists, civil rights groups, families

The Lykhohliad case did not move forward on its own. It moved forward because a structured coalition of Ukrainian civil society applied sustained pressure on institutions. Journalists' organizations, civil rights NGOs, lawyers specializing in witness protection — all worked to ensure the SBI investigation was opened, the commander's suspension was issued, and charges were pursued against Kharkhan for threatening a journalist. Without this coordinated pressure, institutional responses might have been slower, or nonexistent.

This mobilization of Ukrainian civil society is one of the most encouraging elements of the case. Ukraine has an active and capable civil infrastructure that refuses to let institutional abuses pass without a response. It is this infrastructure — investigative media, human rights NGOs, citizen coalitions — that constitutes the true democratic resilience of a country at war. It is not perfect. But it functions well enough that cases like Skelia do not disappear into institutional silence.

International partners as guardrails — their attention matters

The international presence in monitoring the Lykhohliad case plays a meaningful role. Ukraine's partners — the European Union, United States, United Kingdom — genuinely attach importance to the rule of law and press freedom as indicators of the democratic quality of Ukrainian institutions. Reports from international press freedom organizations feed the assessments that partners make of Ukraine as a recipient of international assistance. This sensitivity creates a real institutional incentive for Ukrainian authorities to handle this kind of case with visible rigor.

This is not a cynical argument — it is an observation about the real mechanics of international support. Ukraine benefits from a capital of shared values with its democratic partners. That capital is built and lost. Treating investigative journalists as enemies is a fast way to erode it. Protecting them is a way to consolidate it. Ukrainian decision-makers know this. The outcome of the Skelia case will be a measure of their ability to act accordingly.

Ukrainian military reform — what Skelia reveals about its shortcomings

Announced reforms — training, rotation, soldiers' rights

The 425th Regiment case does not emerge from a vacuum. It is part of an intense debate in Ukraine about military reform — service conditions, the rights of long-serving soldiers, unit rotation, and internal complaint mechanisms. Reports from the Kyiv Independent documented how long-awaited Ukrainian military reform disappointed soldiers who had been serving for years with no prospect of demobilization or regular rotation.

In this context, the 25 deaths at the Skelia regiment are not simply an internal matter for one unit. They fit into a broader picture of service conditions that push soldiers to desert, flee, or die from causes that should have been preventable. Ukrainian military reform — if it is to be effective — will need to address not only the deficient command structures, but also the institutional cultures that allowed a situation like Skelia's to develop uncorrected long enough to produce 25 deaths.

Command accountability — a culture to reform

Military cultures are persistent. A unit where mined perimeters replace lawful discipline, where medical records erase evidence of physical trauma, where soldiers' complaints are ignored — this culture is not the product of one aberrant commander. It is the product of accumulated institutional tolerance, insufficient hierarchical oversight, and a culture of impunity that protects those responsible from the consequences of their actions.

Breaking that culture does not happen with a suspension. It requires a serious SBI investigation that results in real sanctions against documented individuals responsible, a reform of internal military oversight mechanisms, and explicit and visible protection for soldiers who file complaints and journalists who document them. That is a demanding reform agenda for a country at war. But it is precisely this agenda that distinguishes a democracy at war from an authoritarian state fighting to fight.

Conclusion: what the Lykhohliad case says about war and truth

The tension between national security and democratic transparency

The 425th Regiment Skelia case crystallizes a fundamental tension in any democracy at war: the tension between the need to protect military cohesion and the nation's moral support on one side, and the right to information and transparency about institutional failures on the other. This tension has no simple resolution. It requires permanent navigation, case by case, institution by institution, with the awareness that both extremes — total secrecy and total transparency — produce equally bad results.

What the Lykhohliad case illustrates is that there is a response to the problems documented by investigative journalism — the SBI investigation, the commander's suspension, the opening of criminal proceedings against the author of the threats — that is compatible with both national security and democratic standards. This response is neither fast nor comfortable for institutions. But it is the only one that allows maintaining public trust in an army the nation must continue to support.

Kateryna Lykhohliad — a name to remember

Whatever the outcome of the ongoing investigations, Kateryna Lykhohliad has already accomplished something important: she put names on deaths that could have remained anonymous statistics in a report that never would have surfaced. Volodymyr Tsukanov, 32. Vitalii Karat, 38. Dmytro Koval, 50. These three men had lives before they wore a uniform. They deserved to die for reasons their families should have been told from the start.

Journalism that does this — that resists pressures, bears threats, names the dead, and holds institutions accountable — is a pillar of the democracy Ukraine is defending. Treating that journalism as a threat is not only an injustice to one journalist. It is a weakening of that pillar at the very moment it is most needed.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist

Columnist's transparency note

Sources, posture, and limits

This profile draws on Euromaidanpress' report of July 1, 2026 documenting the 425th Regiment Skelia case, Babel's investigation into the 25 non-combat deaths, and Kyiv Independent data on Ukrainian military reform. My editorial line is pro-Ukraine, pro-press freedom, pro-institutional transparency. Supporting Ukraine does not mean shielding its institutions from scrutiny — it means holding them to a democratic standard.

What this profile cannot confirm with certainty

The SBI investigation is ongoing. Definitive conclusions on individual criminal responsibility for the documented deaths are not yet available. The facts describing internal regiment conditions — mined perimeters, isolation cells, bound recruits — are reported on the basis of Babel's investigation and have not been independently verified by this text. This profile presents these elements as serious documented allegations, not facts established by a conclusive judicial procedure.

Sources

Primary sources

Euromaidanpress — Ukraine opened a criminal case over 25 non-combat deaths at its largest assault regiment — July 1, 2026

Kyiv Independent — Ukrainian military reform, soldiers' rights — 2026

The Guardian — Ukraine war briefing, Zelenskyy — June 26, 2026

Secondary sources

Euromaidanpress — Ukraine news — 2026

Kyiv Independent — Ukraine's long-awaited military reform falls short for long-serving troops — 2026

Militarnyi — Ukrainian armed forces context — 2026