The former Deputy Head of the Presidential Office commented on the NABU report and said what assets the bureau's detectives and SAPO prosecutors had managed to acquire

Former Deputy Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Andriy Smirnov commented on today's NABU report to the public and said that the bureau's detectives and SAPO prosecutors acquired elite assets that were registered to their mothers, UNN reports. 

He called the heads of anti-corruption bodies "accidental" and their achievements questionable.

Two random heads of anti-corruption agencies held a massive event for journalists today with a hint of spectacle and exclusivity. They talked about achievements. There are indeed many, from the evolution of incompetence that has grown to an absolute, to basic legal illiteracy, to politicking and internal squabbles in which the vast majority of observers sincerely root for both sides with more passion than the Olympics

However, the most resonant part of his post was the information about assets that were acquired by the bureau's detectives and SAPO prosecutors for nothing and registered in the names of their relatives, according to Smirnov. 

Of course, the karma of these two random characters is also accompanied by the karma of stupidity, and I take this opportunity to say hello to the key SAPO prosecutors who officially buy apartments in the EU for $10,000, to detectives who officially live in luxury apartments in the Kyiv suburbs, registered to their relatives at a cost of $12 thousand, other NABU detectives and SAPO prosecutors with hundreds of land plots registered to their mothers for nothing, and, of course, to these two random examples of human resource inefficiency who are so eager to learn how to play politics that they are bound to risk exposing themselves

If the former official's information is true, then the NACP, which is supposed to be responsible for checking the lifestyle of public officials and the source of their funds, should launch its own investigation against the bureau's detectives and prosecutors. 

At the same time, practice shows that anti-corruption agencies created by "one idea" turn a blind eye to each other's violations. For example, the NACP did not check forensic examinations ordered by NABU detectives from their friends and former colleagues. Although this fact has been recorded. 

Add

Among the NABU's achievements over the past six months was the case against former Minister of Agrarian Policy Mykola Solsky. His detectives accuse him of helping the ATO soldiers privatize land in Sumy region. The NABU believes that the land was occupied and used by the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences, although they cannot provide evidence. Neither detectives, nor prosecutors, nor the scientists from the National Agrarian Academy themselves. The version voiced by the NABU and the SAPO has already been refuted by the Supreme Court and experts who have investigated this issue.

However, detectives continue to "drag out" the investigation, which has been going on for more than 5 years and has exhausted all reasonable time limits.

The next stage in the case will be the interrogation of more than a thousand ATO soldiers. According to NABU head Semen Kryvonos, the soldiers will be interrogated despite the fact that most of them are currently at the front defending the country. He did not specify how exactly.

Optional

NABU is preparing for its first comprehensive audit. In their report on the results of the previous audit, foreign experts identified a number of problems in the NABU's activities. In particular, the auditors concluded that detectives need to communicate with psychologists and the ombudsman.

The NABU audit also revealed signs of low morale among anti-corruption officers and a massive desire to leave the bureau. In particular, detectives are "stressed" by the war and bureaucracy.

In addition, international auditors have statedthat the HACC has been considering cases for years, while NABU detectives can investigate them for decades. However, as practice shows, the duration of an anti-corruption investigation does not affect its quality, as "high-profile" NABU cases against high-ranking officials have repeatedly fallen apart in courts.