Most Ukrainians do not trust NABU - results of international audit

The level of public trust in the NABU remains very low. In 2023, more than half of the respondents (54.4%) did not trust the anti-corruption officers, and less than a third (only about 28% of respondents) fully or at least partially trusted the actions of the detectives. This is stated in the report of independent foreign experts based on the results of the audit in the bureau, UNN writes.

The NABU believes that such a low level of public trust in their agency is due to "massive media attacks" on it, which are carried out on behalf of people who have been served with suspicions by detectives.

However, experts disagreed with the NABU's argument and pointed out that the level of trust in anti-corruption activists is actually affected by the lack of convictions in high-profile cases.

In addition, NABU cases often fall apart in courts, and the accused receive acquittals . This is, in particular, due to manipulations with examinationsordered by detectives within the framework of criminal cases.

The auditors also noted that the level of trust is likely to be affected by the fact that NABU's communication with the public leaves much to be desired. In particular, they recommend that the NABU formulate its public messages more carefully and better communicate the impact of its investigations.

A good example of these auditors' remarks is the case of the anti-corruption activists against the former Minister of Agrarian Policy Mykola Solskyi. The NABU, in its notice of serving Solskyi with a suspicion, even before any court decisions in this case, stated literally "the former head of the Verkhovna Rada's agriculture committee - the current minister - was caught in the possession of state land." However, NABU detectives still cannot explain what land Solskyi seized.

Add

According to a survey conducted by the Razumkov Center sociological service in June 2024, only 4.3% of respondents fully trust the NABU, and 19.6% of those who "rather trust" anti-corruption activists do not.

Thus, it can be concluded that the level of trust of Ukrainians in the NABU has decreased over the year.

Recall

In April, NABU detectives and SAPO prosecutors served Mykola Solskyi with a notice of suspicion of allegedly seizing land plots in Sumy region. The case relates to the events of 2017-2018, when he worked as a lawyer and helped ATO participants realize their right to receive 2 hectares of land.

After Solsky's dismissal from the post of minister, it became known that neither he nor his family nor affiliated persons owned any land in Sumy region. This is confirmed by at least declarations of the former minister.

Moreover, even the NABU detectives themselves cannot explain what exactly Solsky took possession of. According to their version, the crime lies in the fact that the land plots received by the ATO participants allegedly belonged to the National Agrarian Academy . However, even the Academy itself has not been able to find the documents and prove that the land really belongs to them. According to NAAS employees, they considered the land to be theirs because previously there were collective and state farms named after Lenin and Stalin, who were allegedly their heirs.

Thus, the main intrigue of the whole case is whether the detectives will be able to prove that the land belonged to the National Academy of Sciences. After all, if NABU does not prove this fact, the case will most likely fall apart. This may be evidenced by the fact that the detectives tried to "leak" the examinationthat they themselves had ordered, and which was obviously supposed to testify to Solsky's innocence.

As for the ATO participants themselves, who privatized the disputed land, they claimed that their actions were legitimate and that they had a free right to dispose of it. At the same time, the military denied the NABU's arguments.