What's wrong with competition for position of ESBU director. Expert voices main problems

For more than half a year, Ukraine has been watching the competition, which was supposed to become an example of openness, integrity and efficiency of state personnel selection – the competition for the position of director of the Economic Security Bureau of Ukraine (ESBU). This process, which, as promised, was to be conducted transparently and in partnership with the international community, is increasingly raising questions – not only among the competition participants, but also among the public and experts.

Political expert, writer and publicist Volodymyr Tsybulko wrote about this on his blog, UN reports.

According to him, one of the most alarming signs of loss of trust in the competition is the complete self-removal of the competition commission from its key function – direct assessment of the candidates' practical tasks. This stage is critical, as it allows you to check the candidates' ability to analyze, make informed decisions, demonstrate managerial thinking and legal awareness.

"However, as it became known, the competition commission delegated the verification itself to unknown experts. Who are these experts? What powers they had, their professional level, whether they had conflicts of interest – remained behind the curtain. There is no public document on their appointment or grounds for participation in the procedure. This fact violates both the principles of transparency enshrined in Article 3 of the Law of Ukraine "On the Economic Security Bureau", and the basic principles of good governance," the expert notes.

He noted that another fundamental flaw is the complete absence of unified criteria for evaluating candidates' answers. According to him, even for identical answers, different candidates received fundamentally different scores. However, for opposing positions – the same points. In the open access, the expert adds, there are neither approximate correct decisions, nor a decoding of the logic of assigning points. In his opinion, this creates the impression of chaos, and in the worst case – bias.

He also drew attention to the fact that a public professional discussion of the commission members is the norm for such procedures in countries guided by the principles of good governance, but it was completely absent in this competition.

“The greatest concern is not even the subjectivity in assigning points, but the violation of procedural formalization. As of today, the mandatory protocol of approval of the results of the practical tasks stage, which took place on May 13, 2025, has not been published. In accordance with clause 5.15 of the Commission's Regulations, all decisions must be published on the website of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine no later than two working days after their signing. Therefore, the official absence of a document is a violation of normal administrative procedure and a sign of reluctance to record the decision officially,” the blogger writes.

The expert recalled that the competition for the position of head of the ESBU was discussed, in particular, with the International Monetary Fund. The partners expected an open, professional and impartial selection that would meet best practices, therefore, in his opinion, the lack of transparency, the use of opaque experts, unpublished protocols and the silence of the commission are what cause surprise and distrust not only in Ukraine.

The author of the blog emphasized that the main function of the ESBU is to ensure economic stability and combat shadow schemes. But this is impossible without the trust of society. And trust begins with the process of appointing a leader. If this process is opaque, the institution loses its legitimacy even before it starts.

“We hope that the members of the competition commission, government representatives and all parties involved will take into account the risks voiced and make a decision that will meet not only formal norms, but also the principles of integrity, justice and statesmanship. Because it is such decisions that shape the future of institutions that should be trusted by both citizens and the international community,” the expert assured.