The main goal of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine has recently turned from fighting corruption to putting pressure on certain public officials to achieve "external" goals. This opinion was expressed in an exclusive commentary to UNN by Oleksandr Babikov, attorney at law, partner at DEFENSORES.
In my opinion, the main goal of the NABU is not to investigate criminal proceedings and fight corruption, but to put pressure on certain public officials, to create certain preconditions for them to take certain actions, again, those who are interested in this
According to him, only the public can influence this situation. "In my opinion, any public bodies, internal control, public councils, audit commissions that evaluate the work of the NABU should be created exclusively at the expense of Ukrainian citizens. We have to put things in order in our country ourselves, and not hope that someone will come and help us," Babikov added.
In addition, the lawyer drew attention to the fact that in fact more than 70% of criminal proceedings investigated by the NABU do not fall under their jurisdiction.
"Moreover, the NABU says that they are supposed to investigate cases against top officials. Instead, the vast majority of people under investigation are some kind of intermediary, lawyer, some employees, etc. This is the level of the district police department, which would be more successful in even investigating these criminal proceedings," he emphasized.
Babikov also criticized the NABU for investigating criminal proceedings for bribery.
"These cases - 99% - are an absolute provocation. In other words, first, a person is given preconditions, hints that he or she can resolve the issue illegally. Then, when the person comes in, hoping that he or she will be able to resolve the issue because he or she has been hinted at, and announces an offer, it is recorded and the case is sent to court. Everyone is well aware that this is an indicator that is made at the expense of people who do not actually pose a great public danger, unlike the real bribe-takers who hold positions and can resolve issues worth millions of dollars," the lawyer emphasized.
Add
The NABU is preparing for its first international independent audit under the leadership of Director Semen Kryvonos. The head of the bureau recently statedthat he is "very much looking forward" to the audit, which should reveal both the strengths and weaknesses of the bureau.
Recently, there have been frequent statements about the loss of independence of anti-corruption bodies in Ukraine. In particular, this has been stated by the recently dismissed First Deputy Director of the Bureau, Gizo Uglava. He has repeatedly hinted that decisions in the NABU are made under the influence of external factors, not on the basis of the law. Among the individuals and institutions that he believes exerted this pressure were activists of the Anti-Corruption Action Center (AntAC) and the head of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Anti-Corruption Policy, who, as Uglava noted, used to work for the AntAC.
Uglava has repeatedly emphasized that the actions against him indicate serious problems in the NABU investigation process, which is focused on achieving external goals rather than establishing the truth.
The situation with Uglava, who was dismissed after allegations of NABU's problems, may have a significant impact on the upcoming international audit of NABU. Uhla's allegations of pressure, corruption schemes, and possible manipulation within NABU may increase the attention of auditors to the bureau's internal problems and encourage them to scrutinize internal procedures, control systems, and reporting.
Earlier, UNN mentioned that, according to auditors, the NABU staff is in a depressed state, needs psychologists and most of the employees plan to resign in the near future.
At the same time, the NABU has no trust of Ukrainians, and the economic effect of their activities is zero. After all, over the years, tens of billions of hryvnias have been spent on NABU, SAPO, NAPC, and HACC from the budget.
The reason for the lack of trust in anti-corruption activists may be loud accusations of top officials by the NABU, which eventually result in acquittals. An example is the case of former Minister Volodymyr Omelyan. He was accused of budget losses due to the reduction of port fees that he introduced. But in court, all the arguments of SAPO detectives and prosecutors were shattered as worthless. By the way, neither the NABU detectives nor the SAPO prosecutors have ever publicly apologized to Omelyan or been punished for illegally bringing him to criminal responsibility.
A similar story may happen to former Minister Mykola Solsky, who was accused in May of misappropriating land in Sumy region in favor of ATO fighters. This story is already eight years old, and the reasonable timeframe of the investigation has been exhausted, but detectives decided to report it only this year. Moreover, at the time when Solsky achieved results in negotiations with the Poles on the export of agricultural products.
However, the publicly available materials indicate dubious evidence of detectives, as evidenced by the expert opinion of manipulation with the examinations in this case. They tried to "leak" one of them and annul it through the court - probably because such an examination testified to the innocence of the former minister.