“NABU auditors announced that they will conduct a random audit of the bureau – only during the current director’s period NABU auditors announced that they will conduct a random audit of the bureau – only during the current director’s period.”, — write on: unn.ua
Details
On October 3, NABU finally started the first external independent audit. The other day, after criticism from the public, the auditors finally approved the criteria and methodology for evaluating the efficiency of the bureau’s work.
“Approve the period that will be covered by the assessment (audit) of the performance of the NABU, from the date of the appointment of the current director of the NABU to the date of approval by the Commission of Criteria and the methodology for assessing the performance of the NABU, namely from March 6, 2023 to November 18, 2024,” the auditors determined at its meeting.
Thus, a huge period of time since the beginning of the establishment of this body, when it was managed by Artem Sytnyk and his first deputy Gizo Uhlava, who is now accused of “leaking” information from the bureau and pressure on whistleblowers, will remain outside the attention of the first audit at NABU.
How many other violations could have been committed during the time that the audit will not cover remains to be guessed, but it is clear that limiting the audit to only recent years raises questions about its completeness and objectivity. Ignoring the period when NABU was headed by previous heads risks concealing systemic problems and abuses that could have affected the bureau’s reputation and effectiveness.
An audit that would cover the entire period of NABU’s activity, from the moment of its creation, would provide a more comprehensive and transparent assessment of the body’s work, and would also allow identifying all possible violations and problems, regardless of when they occurred. After all, the selective approach to verification calls into question the real goals and results of this initiative.
Let’s add
Recently, the public has had many questions about the work of NABU detectives. In particular, statements about the loss of independence of anti-corruption bodies in Ukraine are often heard. This was stated, among other things, by the recently dismissed first deputy director of the bureau, Gizo Uhlava. He repeatedly hinted that decisions in NABU are made under the influence of external factors, and not on the basis of the law. Among the persons and institutions that, in his opinion, exerted this pressure were the activists of the Anti-Corruption Center (CPC) and the head of the Verkhovna Rada committee on anti-corruption policy, who, as Uhlava noted, previously worked in the CPC.
Uglava emphasized that the actions against him indicate serious problems in the NABU investigation process, which are aimed at achieving external goals, and not at establishing the truth.
The same opinion is supported by lawyers, who also stated that the real goal of anti-corruption activists has changed from fighting corruption to putting pressure on certain public officials to achieve “external” goals.
In addition, human rights defenders sound the alarm because of systematic violations of the presumption of innocence by NABU detectives and SAP prosecutors.
This was recorded, in particular, in the Shadow Report to Chapter 23 “Justice and Fundamental Rights” of the Report of the European Commission on Ukraine for 2023, prepared by a coalition of public organizations. According to the document, in a number of court cases, judges recorded violations of the principle of presumption of innocence by NABU detectives, who in public comments and interviews actually “appointed” the defendants as guilty.
Not infrequently, high-profile accusations of gang officials by NABU result in acquittals. An example is the case of ex-minister Volodymyr Omelyan. He was accused of budget losses due to the reduction of port dues that he introduced. But in court, all the arguments of the detectives and prosecutors of the SAP were completely dismissed as worthless. By the way, neither NABU detectives nor SAP prosecutors have incurred any public apology to Omelyan and punishment for illegally bringing him to criminal responsibility.
A similar story may repeat itself with ex-minister Mykola Solsky, who in May was accused of appropriating land in the Sumy region for the benefit of ATO fighters. This story is already eight years old, the reasonable time limit for the investigation has been exhausted, but the detectives decided to announce it only this year. In addition, at the moment when Solsky achieved results in negotiations with the Poles regarding the unblocking of the border.
However, publicly available materials testify to the dubious evidence of the detectives, as evidenced by the expert opinion of the manipulation of expertise in this case. One of them they tried to “merge” and annul through the court – presumably because such an examination testified to the innocence of the ex-minister.