Former prosecutor of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office Stanislav Bronevytsky stated about a dangerous trend when lawful checks of NABU employees' involvement in offenses are automatically interpreted as pressure on anti-corruption bodies and interference in their independence. According to him, these information campaigns are quickly picked up by certain deputies, bloggers, and activists.
As an example, Bronevytsky cited a recent statement by NABU about law enforcement installing listening devices on one of the Bureau's employees. He noted that immediately after this, information about alleged "pressure" on NABU began to spread, although all actions of law enforcement were carried out within the framework of current legislation.
"As soon as the SBU or another law enforcement agency tries to verify any information about the possible involvement of a specific detective or group of NABU detectives in a crime, information noise about 'pressure' and 'interference in independence' immediately starts," Bronevytsky noted.
He emphasized that a NABU employee ID does not grant any immunity from criminal liability. Bureau employees, like representatives of other law enforcement agencies, can be checked in the manner prescribed by law if relevant information is available.
At the same time, Bronevytsky warned against forming a perception in society of a special status or de facto inviolability of NABU employees. In his opinion, the myth of their special immunity, spread by certain activists and bloggers, could create conditions for impunity.
"If any attempt to verify information about a possible crime is automatically presented as an attack on the independence of anti-corruption bodies, this could complicate the work of detecting, documenting, and stopping offenses," the former SAP prosecutor concluded.