Since the beginning of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine's (NABU) activities (December 2015) until today, there have been almost no legally binding verdicts in criminal proceedings investigated by the bureau's detectives against members of parliament, heads of central executive authorities, and judges.
This was written by lawyer and Honored Lawyer of Ukraine Volodymyr Bogatyr in his blog on "Ukrainska Pravda," as reported by Ukrainian News.
The lawyer refers to official information from NABU itself. Bogatyr analyzed NABU's activities based on open data about registered criminal offenses and the results of their pre-trial investigations, published by the Office of the Prosecutor General.
Meanwhile, there are 148 criminal proceedings in which individuals were served with notices of suspicion. However, only 27 cases were sent to court with indictments during this period, while almost three times more - 71 cases - were closed.
"This difference between recorded offenses, served suspicions, and indictments provides a much more realistic picture of NABU detectives' work," Bogatyr believes.
"The figures show that in NABU's current activities, out of all actually investigated criminal cases (with identified suspects), approximately 18% reach the court. At the same time, 48% of proceedings are closed due to, for example, the absence of a criminal offense event or the absence of elements of a crime in the act," the lawyer added.
But the work of cleansing the government from corruption does not end with pre-trial investigation, the lawyer emphasizes. "Because the norm of Article 62 of the Constitution, which enshrined the world standard of presumption of innocence, simultaneously defined the only possible criterion for the effectiveness of fighting crime - verdicts based on prosecution arguments."
According to the lawyer, the number of verdicts regarding members of parliament, heads of central executive authorities, and judges, according to NABU's own information, is almost zero.
At the same time, from January 2016 to May 2024, in criminal proceedings, 63 members of parliament, 46 heads of central executive authorities, including ministers and their deputies, and 86 judges were served with notices of suspicion.
"In fact, this is about a special systemic practice where deputies, officials, and judges are served with suspicions that NABU detectives are unable to confirm in court," Bogatyr believes.
At the same time, in his opinion, the trends of suspicions against top officials are clearly not related to changes in legislation, but to certain political - extra-legal processes in the country.
"The zero number of verdicts after dozens of suspicions, unfortunately, may indicate the political subtext of anti-corruption bodies' activities in Ukraine and, in particular, attempts to use NABU as a tool of pressure, including on the parliamentary and judicial branches of power," the lawyer believes.
He emphasized that "such attempts at pressure may contain signs of encroachment on the principles of separation of powers and balance of power."
As Ukrainian News reported, NACP admitted that it has data on corruption of NABU detective Slonevsky, but is not taking any measures.
Earlier, lawyer and jurist Volodymyr Bogatyr stated that the scandal with information leakage in the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine has called into question the effectiveness of reforms and international assistance in this direction, and also forced to think about whether there is effective oversight of NABU's activities.
Who we are: About us, Contacts. How we write news and our principles: Editorial code. We did our best. If you found this valuable – please support us.
To request a correction, please send an email.