The Cabinet of Ministers still does not have the results of the NABU audit: the Commission's work has been going on for more than half a year

Despite the start of the external independent audit of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine in September 2024, the Cabinet of Ministers still does not have the results of the audit. This is stated in the government's response to the information request of UNN.    

As stated in the letter, the Commission for External Independent Evaluation (Audit) of the NABU was formed by the order of the Cabinet of Ministers of September 3, 2024 No. 832-r. The commission included international experts — Martin Arpo, Robert Westbrook and Hermione Teresa Cronier.

At the same time, the Cabinet of Ministers' response does not provide any information on the interim or final results of the audit. It is only noted that "the Commission's work began in September 2024 and continues to the present", and information about its activities can be found on the Government Portal.

Thus, despite the legal requirement to conduct an independent assessment of the effectiveness of the NABU annually, the public remains without access to its results.

Against this background, the effectiveness of the NABU team is also raising more and more questions. April 16 marked the 10th anniversary of the bureau's creation. Journalist and publicist Serhiy Lyamets summed up symbolic results of the structure's activities, comparing it to the biblical David, who challenged Goliath. But unlike the biblical story, the real "David" — according to the author — has lost public trust, sinking into privileges and political games.

In his analysis, Lyamets criticized:

• the pettiness of cases that other bodies are able to investigate;

• the low quality of investigations, which often fall apart in courts;

• internal cronyism and staff turnover;

• and even signs of corruption within the bureau itself.

"Time has shown that you should look not only at Goliath, but also at David," Lyamets notes, emphasizing that the NABU is increasingly bogged down in its own scandals, rather than worrying about what it was created for.

Despite this, he admits that there are still individual honest professionals within the structure. However, in general, the anti-corruption system in Ukraine, in his opinion, has lost its halo of hope and is increasingly turning into a bureaucratic mechanism with political undertones.

As a reminder, lawyer Rostyslav Kravets draws attention to the lack of reaction to corruption scandals involving NABU detectives themselves. In particular, it concerns manipulations with cryptocurrency: investigations into fraud worth millions, as well as the case of "leaks" by former Deputy Director of the NABU Gizo Uglava.

According to Kravets, the anti-corruption bloc has proved to be ineffective and should be liquidated.

In parallel with criticism from the legal community, the anti-corruption vertical is increasingly focusing on the inner circle of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. It recently became known about a new suspicion against the former Deputy Head of the Office of the President, Andriy Smyrnov. Activists from the NABU's orbit spread messages that the case involved people from Volodymyr Zelenskyy's inner circle — they mentioned "a family friend from Kryvyi Rih", "the daughter of Zelenskyy's teacher" and the management of an Italian company that allegedly owns the President's villa in Forte dei Marmi.

These events fit into a general trend: in recent years, the NABU, SAP and HACC have formed a separate anti-corruption bloc with an extremely high level of autonomy. The actual combination of investigative, prosecutorial and judicial functions allows them not only to conduct investigations, but also to shape the political agenda, parallel justice.

In last year's international audit of the NABU's activities, it was directly recommended to intensify investigations into representatives of the Office of the President. At the time, it was emphasized that there were no such cases at the time of the report, and that the NABU's jurisdiction should be expanded in this direction.

Statements by activists close to the anti-corruption environment about a "minefield" around the current President indicate that the anti-corruption bloc is increasingly becoming a political instrument of influence.