NABU is known for its high-profile statements in the investigations it undertakes. The Bureau has already been accused of violating the presumption of innocence - they have repeatedly made statements that create the impression of a defendant's guilt even before the completion of the trial. It was a matter of time before the court would side with the accused and disagree with NABU's conclusions. And now it has happened, immediately reaching an international level. Lawyer Yuriy Sukhov announced the closure of proceedings by a Polish court against his client - former head of "Ukravtodor" Sławomir Nowak, writes UNN.
Recently, a Polish court closed the proceedings against Nowak on rehabilitating grounds, as the prosecutor withdrew the charges. Perhaps because he realized the inadmissibility of the evidence and materials obtained from NABU? Probably, as always, they are, to put it mildly, not like evidence? I understand that the CPC, NABU, and HACC will no longer disclose these circumstances to all of Ukraine? Or what? And if this information becomes public, then, probably, they will say that the court and the prosecutor in Poland were bribed?
Nowak's case - an investigation at the interstate level
In 2020, Sławomir Nowak was charged with leading an organized criminal group, receiving benefits from corrupt activities, and laundering money obtained through criminal means. It was alleged that Nowak allegedly received property benefits in exchange for providing private entities with contracts for the construction and repair of roads in Ukraine.
As Sukhov emphasizes, Ukrainian anti-corruption officials loudly announced this investigation in the media - as always.
But they (NABU detectives - ed.) went further and, with the participation of the prosecutors' offices of Poland and Ukraine, as well as the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau of Poland and its rudimentary twin brother NABU, created an interstate investigative and prosecutorial group. As they pompously said then, this was the first case in the history of international cooperation. Then they spent a lot of state funds on this investigation. Foreign business trips, all that, back and forth... As a result, they deliberately tarnished the reputation of a well-known Polish politician, and the pre-trial investigation in the case against him (in Ukraine - ed.) was quietly stopped. Copies of the criminal proceedings materials were sent to Poland
And now in Poland, the case was brought to court and closed due to the prosecutor's refusal to press charges.
There is morality, immorality, and inevitable consequences in all of this
The lawyer expects that in the future, Nowak may file lawsuits for moral damages, as his reputation has been harmed.
And, unfortunately, for the people of Ukraine, there is another component in this situation. Sławomir Nowak is a citizen of Poland and has a different understanding of values than Ukrainian officials. Because, thanks to the efforts of the CPC and NABU, his reputation was almost irrevocably destroyed, and this caused him irreparable moral and material damage. A multi-million lawsuit will obviously be fairly considered in due course by the Pechersky, Solomyansky, or Shevchenkivsky District Court of Kyiv, or perhaps some Warsaw local court. And it is still unknown, but of course, probably predictable, what the result will be. So, I think some people should set aside donor or budget money, which, by the way, is formed from the contributions of ordinary citizens, to compensate for the damage.
The first warning sign is already there, the lawyer emphasizes, this is the case of "Monakhov and others v. Ukraine", within which the former head of the State Fiscal Service Roman Nasirov complained about not being provided with proper medical treatment while in custody. And he won.
Not by Nowak alone
Another case that demonstrates NABU's "successes" not only in Ukraine but also at the interstate level is a criminal proceeding that has been fruitlessly dragging on for 10 years and looks more like a business dispute. This is the case against businessman Oleksiy Fedorychev, owner of the "TIS-Zerno" and "TIS-Dobryva" terminals in the "Pivdenny" port. Detectives of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine have been persecuting the entrepreneur for many years. The criminal proceeding against him rather looks like an attempt to raid the terminals by NABU, which has dragged on for too long.
In fact, for 10 years they have not been able to serve a notice of suspicion on the businessman or choose a preventive measure for him. And regular attempts to seize property, although they end in failure every time, significantly hinder the conduct of critically important business during the war, related to ensuring food security.
Clear evidence that the case against Fedorychev is a business dispute involving law enforcement anti-corruption officers is the decision of the court of the Principality of Monaco, where the businessman has long resided. Monaco judges refused to serve a notice of suspicion on Oleksiy Fedorychev, stating that his case is a commercial dispute, not a criminal one.
...the information set out in the requests does not allow the nature of the case to be defined as criminal, which enables the competent authorities of the Principality of Monaco to conclude: the essence of the case relates more to facts that underlie a dispute of a purely economic nature
It is noteworthy that even the native HACC did not side with NABU here. The judges of the High Anti-Corruption Court saw no grounds for seizing property or choosing a preventive measure for Fedorychev. They even refused to extend the terms of the pre-trial investigation after they expired.
However, the ingenuity of NABU detectives is striking. Instead of accepting defeat and admitting that the case was custom-made, they formally transferred it for investigation to the National Police. Having joined the investigative group, the first thing NABU officers did was force their colleagues in the Pechersky District Court of Kyiv to push through a decision to extend the terms of the investigation.
Not getting what they wanted in the HACC, the detectives are trying to push through the necessary decisions in the Pechersky District Court of Kyiv. So everything indicates that NABU is too interested in the terminals in the "Pivdenny" port.
NABU's stubborn persistence
At the beginning of the article, we indicated that detectives were "caught" violating the presumption of innocence. These accusations even entered the Shadow Report to Chapter 23 "Justice and Fundamental Rights" of the European Commission's 2023 Report on Ukraine. According to the document, in a number of court cases, judges recorded violations of the principle of presumption of innocence by NABU detectives, who in public comments and interviews actually "appointed" the defendants guilty. Such communication, which undermines the foundations of justice, forms prejudice in society and leads to erroneous conclusions even before the final verdict is rendered by the court.
This principle is the cornerstone of fair justice. And its violation in itself casts a shadow on an institution that still enjoys the trust of international partners. Especially when it turns out that the accusations are not supported by anything and the case is closed.
Under such conditions, in the pursuit of their own PR or benefit of representatives, an body that should fight corruption, Ukraine risks losing its reputation in the eyes of not only international institutions, but also potential or existing private investors.