NABU detectives and SAPO prosecutors are violating the presumption of innocence, as stated in the European Commission's Shadow Report. At the same time, the High Anti-Corruption Court ignores the problem, and together in this anti-corruption triad, it loses its independence and objectivity. This was stated in an exclusive commentary to UNN by Director of the Kharkiv Human Rights Group Yevhen Zakharov.
He also emphasized that anti-corruption bodies leak information, including data from covert investigations, to controlled activists who, together with NABU and SAPO, defame people before the court's verdict.
"First of all, the HACC should pay attention to this, that is, when such events occur, when the guilty are appointed immediately, the principle of presumption of innocence is violated... Everything happens as in that joke: "Your daughter is a prostitute, but I have a son, and you go and prove it now." Unfortunately, this is how our anti-corruption bodies work. They leak covert investigative intelligence to controlled anti-corruption activists, and they start defaming people, violating the principle of presumption of innocence. Both they and the anti-corruption agencies themselves," Zakharov noted.
In his opinion, anti-corruption bodies should "return to the bosom of law" and not violate human rights.
Another problem is the selective approach of anti-corruption officials to the amount of bail when choosing preventive measures. Depending on the status and influence of the person, bail amounts range from symbolic to enormous amounts. Even if a person is found not guilty, he or she must "freeze" significant funds to satisfy the media appetites of anti-corruption activists. And it's good if the person has the money, but sometimes it's simply impossible to raise the required amounts.
Zakharov continues that the HACC suffers the greatest reputational losses. Instead of being independent of the NABU and the SAPO, it is increasingly playing along with them, distorting the principles of justice. A dependent court is even worse than a corrupt one, the human rights activist emphasizes.
"In my opinion, only an independent court can be a fair court. Moreover, an independent corrupt court is better than a dependent court. Because a dependent court is a firing squad. The court must be absolutely independent of the anti-corruption authorities. In general, any court should be independent of investigative bodies. Otherwise, it is no longer a court," Zakharov said.
He also called on Ombudsman Dmytro Lubinets to pay attention to the systematic violation of human rights during the investigation of criminal proceedings by NABU detectives and SAPO prosecutors. The Ombudsman is responsible for responding to cases of violation of the presumption of innocence.
Context
The presumption of innocence is one of the fundamental principles of the rule of law, which stipulates that everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
However, in its activities, the NABU often violates this principle by publicly accusing suspects and actually shaping public opinion before the trial.
This was documented, in particular, in the Shadow Report to Chapter 23 "Justice and Fundamental Rights" of the European Commission's 2023 Report on Ukraine, prepared by a coalition of civil society organizations. 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.
Oleh Shram, former advisor to the director of the State Bureau of Investigation, said in a commentary to UNN that by violating the presumption of innocence, anti-corruption agencies are trying to shift the focus on the results of their activities from those expected by society to the intermediate stages of the investigation.
Allegations of bias and political bias of NABU detectives in their investigations have been made repeatedly. Recently, however, they have started to be heard from the bureau's leadership. The reason for this was that anti-corruption activists launched an investigation against the former first deputy director of the NABU, Gizo Uglava. Only after he found himself on the other side of the investigation did he admit that there were serious problems with the investigation conducted by anti-corruption activists and noted that the bureau was not focused on establishing the truth but on achieving "external goals.
There are also concerns about violations of the presumption of innocence by the NABU in the case against former Minister of Agrarian Policy Mykola Solskyi. In particular, the Kharkiv Human Rights Group criticized the NABU for statements in this case that violate the presumption of innocence. The real reason for the prosecution of Solsky is the reform of the land market in Ukraine.