NABU “leaks” information to activists in almost all of its cases - Kharkiv human rights group names the most high-profile ones
Kyiv • UNN
A Kharkiv-based human rights group has reported regular violations of the presumption of innocence in high-profile cases by the NABU. The bureau's detectives pass information to activists in almost all investigations.
NABU detectives and SAPO prosecutors resort to violations of the presumption of innocence and "leaks" of information to controlled activists in almost all cases they investigate. This was stated by the director of the Kharkiv Human Rights Group, Yevhen Zakharov, in an exclusive commentary to UNN.
In fact, in almost all cases, information is being leaked and the presumption of innocence is being violated, starting with the case of (former MP Mykola - ed.) Martynenko. The most egregious case is the Golden Mandarin case - the illegal prosecution of Heorhiy Logvynskyi, who was protected by international immunity as the husband of an ECHR judge
The human rights activist also named a number of other criminal proceedings in which NABU and SAPO violated the presumption of innocence, including the case against the owner of Ukrlandfarming, Oleh Bakhmatyuk, judge Pavlo Vovk and judges of the DACK, former NBU Governor Kyrylo Shevchenko, former MP Oleksandr Hranovskyi, and former Supreme Court Chief Justice Vsevolod Kniazev.
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 Report on Ukraine for 2023, prepared by a coalition of NGOs. 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.
Earlier, the Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group statedthat by ignoring the problem of violation of the presumption of innocence by the NABU, the High Anti-Corruption Court also loses its independence and objectivity. In his opinion, instead of being independent of the NABU and the SAPO, the HACC 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.
The former first deputy director of the bureau, Gizo Uglava, has also stated that NABU detectives are dependent on activists. He has repeatedly hinted that decisions in the bureau are made under the influence of external factors, not on the basis of the law. Among the individuals and institutions that, in his opinion, 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 at the AntAC.
The same opinion is supported by lawyers, who also stated that the real goal of anti-corruption activists has turned from fighting corruption to putting pressure on certain public officials to achieve "external" goals.
