10 years of work of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine: Uncovering a scheme worth… 800 euros as the pinnacle of anti-corruption efforts. European media are concerned about the degradation of anti-corruption bodies in Ukraine.
European partners and media outlets, including Brussels Reporter, have drawn attention to the sharp increase in scandals and complaints regarding the work of Ukraine’s anti-corruption bodies, namely the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC), the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO). These institutions are financed, among other sources, through EU funds — that is, by ordinary European citizens.
Brussels Reporter provides an overview of the main problems and abuses committed by the anti-corruption institutions, as highlighted by prominent human rights activists and experts in Ukraine. They believe that NABU, SAPO, and HACC have failed to live up to the expectations placed upon them by Ukrainian society and international partners.
Experts confidently argue that in Ukraine, the work of NABU has, contrary to the aims of anti-corruption reform, turned into a complete mockery. This, in the context of the ongoing war, undermines Ukraine’s capacity to resist Russian aggression. This is stated in an analytical study published on the portal From.ua, which reviews the achievements of NABU and SAPO over the past 10 years. The material is based on open sources.
Ukrainians have lost trust in the anti-corruption agencies.
The material mentions that the Bureau recently celebrated its 10th anniversary, but among all the high-profile cases, there wasn’t a single worthy one that could be presented to society at the anniversary banquet. Except for the dubious catching of petty appraisers for bribes, who aren’t even under NABU’s jurisdiction according to the Law.
In particular, the authors point out: if we look at different perspectives regarding the assessment of NABU’s activities, the verdict will be disappointing – the bureau has lost people’s trust and has utterly failed to meet society’s expectations regarding the fight against top-level corruption. This is eloquently shown by the level of distrust in NABU among ordinary people according to the Razumkov Centre survey, which stands at 62%(!) (61% don’t trust SAPO, and 72% distrust HACC).
This comes as no surprise. None of the major scandals that have rocked a bleeding Ukraine in recent times have made it to court – let alone resulted in fair punishment for the perpetrators. This was mentioned in a resonant story from the special project of journalistic investigations ANTIMAFIA by the Ukraine News media agency.
Meanwhile, NABU itself is caught in loud corruption scandals almost daily. A recent example? The exposure of millions in hidden cryptocurrency allegedly held by more than a dozen detectives and staff members, reported by Glavred.
Peak of NABU’s Abuses
The article emphasizes that the collapse of NABU’s methods and integrity has become so dire that even long-time NABU “fan”, as he called himself, public figure, volunteer, and former head of the Luhansk Regional Military-Civil Administration, Heorhiy Tuka, has spoken out. At a recent press conference, he expressed his dismay:
“The widespread use of the illegal institution of ‘agents’ and illegal provocation of crimes, which appears in every second case, disgraces NABU… Now NABU’s independence is completely lost, as is people’s trust in anti-corruption bodies.”
As stated in the publication, the peak of NABU’s abuses is the scandal involving the wiretapping of lawyers, which recently shocked the human rights and legal community. The most frightening thing in this situation is that the detectives intended not just to learn about opponents’ plans, but to use data obtained illegally as an argument for prosecution in court, which didn’t happen even during Yanukovych’s time. The very idea that HACC might accept such evidence is described as “the absolute rock bottom of justice.”.
In connection with this scandal, one cannot help but recall the strange story told by well-known human rights activist and lawyer Tetiana Ivanova at a round table at Interfax. She recounted how: “A year and a half ago, the Supreme Court issued a final decision regarding the former director general of a state special enterprise. It was established that NABU employees examined the person’s phone and destroyed important information in this phone that would have aided in his defense. This was established by the decision of the cassation instance. This case was sent for reconsideration to the appellate court.”
“Think about it again: NABU gets into people’s phones to destroy information that could exonerate them before the law!!! Among other things, this could be data that, for example, provides an alibi or an important message/letter that reveals the motives of one or another action that justifies the suspect… And one can not only delete something useful but also add something harmful that wasn’t there before, but which would provide grounds for suspicion.” That is, falsification of prosecution evidence is already a reality, journalists write.
Absurd Case for… 800 Euros
As emphasized in the material, the current crisis state in NABU and the sham of the Bureau’s work is clearly visible in the so-called “top case” about a bribe of 38,000 UAH (800€).
Journalists learned that this involves the co-owners of “Binom-Group” LLC, Vitalii Zaluzhnyi and Serhii Fil. The article notes that these TOP criminals petty swindlers were caught red-handed by NABU detectives led by Volodymyr Pachevskyi, and under the supervision of SAPO prosecutor Serhii Builenko, whose declarations, by the way, show purchases of apartments in the capital worth millions.
According to the investigation data that reached the media, Zaluzhnyi and Fil demanded undue advantage from a deputy (who, according to preliminary data, is Pokholchuk Roman Volodymyrovych) for preparing a land valuation report at the legal value. It concerned a land plot in Uman at the address: Zavodska Street, 25. It was purchased by entrepreneur Kostiantyn Levchenko for 816,000 UAH, but later sold to an Israeli citizen for 2.13 million UAH.
As a result, Zaluzhnyi and Fil allegedly valued their services at 38,000 UAH. They were officially handed suspicion notices for receiving undue advantage and its legalization, and the deputy – for providing this advantage.
Media workers note: what’s surprising is not this, but the fact that bribe-takers who work for such laughably “small amounts” are subjects of NABU and SAPO investigations. Since when do petty bribery investigations involving low-level property appraisers (who arguably only defrauded a Hasidic man planning to build a hotel in Uman) fall under NABU’s and SAPO’s jurisdiction? Damage to the state – zero, benefit to the budget – also nonexistent. Once again, the story is the same: trivial results dressed up as headline-grabbing anti-corruption wins, funded by taxpayers.
What is HACC’s Role in the Degradation of Anti-corruption Bodies?
The authors of the article add that even if this case with a bribe of less than a thousand dollars can be proven, it will be considered by the smartest HACC judges, who receive salaries of 200,000 UAH and are called to punish TOP bribe-takers. However, judging by recent high-profile statements by human rights defenders, HACC, despite expectations, has failed to become an independent judicial anti-corruption body demonstrating high standards of justice.
In this context, the head of the Kharkiv Human Rights Group, Yevhen Zakharov, recently harshly criticized NABU and, especially, HACC’s policy, noting that anti-corruption fighters need to return to the legal field, not be heroes of an anecdote about a “daughter-prostitute.”
Currently, HACC does not respond in any way to the constant leaks of information from NABU and SAPO to controlled activists. These, in turn, shame people, publicly declaring them guilty even before a court decision, which may later be acquittal. This violates the presumption of innocence.
“First of all, HACC should pay attention to this, that is, when such events occur, when they immediately declare people guilty, the principle of presumption of innocence is violated… It all plays out like in that joke: ‘Your daughter is a prostitute.’ – ‘But I have a son!’ – ‘Well, go and prove it now.” That’s how, unfortunately, the work of our anti-corruption bodies is built. They leak covert investigative search data to controlled anti-corruption activists, and they begin to shame people, violating the principle of presumption of innocence. Both they and the anti-corruption bodies themselves,” noted Zakharov.
Moreover, the exploits of NABU and HACC have been included in a critical shadow report by the European Commission, which states that the High Anti-Corruption Court is becoming increasingly dependent on NABU and SAPO, and its judges allow these anti-corruption bodies to violate the Constitution in terms of human rights.
“Any court must be independent of investigative bodies, because otherwise it is no longer a court,” the Kharkiv Human Rights Group comments on the European Commission’s critical report on HACC. But we do not see anything like this in Ukraine.
Does Ukraine Even Need Such a NABU?
The authors of the article also draw attention to another indisputable fact: if we take the figure for the entire period of existence of specialized anti-corruption structures, it is no less eloquent:
Total expenditures (2016-2024): approximately 12.04 billion UAH.
Direct reimbursements, without padding (2016-2024): approximately 3.14 billion UAH.
So we have roughly the same proportional picture, which shows that anti-corruption in Ukraine is an ineffective and expensive toy that only breeds lawlessness and deteriorates even faster than the exchange rate of the hryvnia and public trust in it..
Thus, NABU, according to well-known investigative journalist Yuriy Nikolov: “has become very similar to any law enforcement agency, which aims not to fight corruption, but to boast about indicators that border on ‘whitewashing’ the subjects. This is when your case falls apart along the way, or you’re given the opportunity to make a deal: sin–pay–and keep sinning.'”