In a commentary to UNN, former MP Ihor Mosiychuk expressed serious reservations about the initiative to create an expert institution at the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU). According to him, such a structure could become a tool for manipulating expert opinions, which, in his opinion, poses a threat to the objectivity of investigations.
Mosiychuk emphasized that expert institutions in Ukraine should remain independent to ensure impartiality in their conclusions. He warned that the creation of an expert body under the control of the NABU could turn into a mechanism for "riveting" examinations that would be tailored to the needs of investigators.
"If anti-corruption activists have complaints against existing expert institutions, such as KFI, they should openly voice them. However, the creation of its own expert structure only reinforces suspicions of simplifying the work and strengthening control over the investigation process," the former MP said.
Critics of the creation of a new expert institution at the NABU also point out that international experts have previously expressed doubts about the objectivity of the examinations conducted within the NABU. In particular, manipulations with expert examinations have repeatedly drawn criticism, such as in the cases of Rotterdam+ and former Minister of Infrastructure Volodymyr Omelyan.
Mosiychuk concluded that the creation of an expert institution at the NABU could lead to a significant increase in the number of questionable examinations, which, in turn, could turn anti-corruption investigations into biased persecutions similar to Soviet-era political repression.
Context
NABU detectives are often caught "painting" forensic examinations they need. In particular, they order them from their friends, and the NACP turns a blind eye. And they "leak" expert opinions they don't need and try to cancel them, as happened in the case of former Minister of Agrarian Policy Mykola Solskyi.
In general, the "drawing" of examinations by detectives often leads to acquittals by the HACC. This was the case with the case of ex-minister Volodymyr Omelian, who was acquitted, and the repeatedly closed Rotterdam+ case. According to lawyer Iryna Odynets, the NABU lost in court because during the investigation, detectives in these cases "drew" forensic examinations in friendly private offices, and then unsuccessfully tried to confirm their accusations. Volodymyr Omelyan himself also noted that detectives engaged "dubious experts" during the investigation of the case against him.
Given the repeated facts of such manipulations, the idea of NABU head Semen Kryvonos to create his own expert institution for the bureau looks extremely alarming. In this case, there may be many more "painted" examinations, and thus NABU investigations may turn into biased persecutions similar to the mass political terror of the Soviet NKVD.