“NABU exposed a large-scale embezzlement scheme. Transparency International Ukraine calls for a transition from slogans to systemic solutions — contests, responsibility and control.”, — write: www.pravda.com.ua
However, all that the Government has done so far in response to the situation is to suspend only one of the two ministers involved in the investigation, and also to send the State Audit Service to check the purchases of JSC NAEK “Energoatom”.
Later it became known also about the dismissal of the supervisory board of “Energoatom”. Only two days later, the President called for the dismissal of Herman Galushchenko and Svitlana Grynchuk, who are involved in the investigation, and stated the need for sanctions against the suspects in the case.
Advertising:
Meanwhile, a number of Telegram channels began to spread news that this investigation was actually in the hands of the Russians.
To be honest, these news are depressing for me and incite me to pessimistic thoughts. But in no case because of the investigation itself, but actually because of what it unearthed.
Investigation and suspicion are good First of all, it is important to note that the investigation and its likely results are definitely good. Despite the scandal, the attention of the media, in particular the international ones, is the most important thing the scheme will cease and the funds will not be embezzled further. In particular, it was precisely for such results that we defended the independence of NABU and SAP in the summer.
Of course, in addition to the investigation itself and the suspicions within it, we are waiting for specific verdicts and prosecution of the guilty. It should be understood that this will not happen immediately, because we live in a legal country, where the pre-trial investigation and the trial of the case must be completed. However, of course we expect accountability for corrupt officials.
Read also: Zelensky’s “Svynarchuks”. How the president’s friends robbed the country during the war
The reaction of the authorities At first, the president spoke only in general terms that he supported the investigation, and that all those responsible should be brought to justice. However, two days later he called for the release of the ministers involved in the case and spoke about the need for sanctions for the suspects. These are the minimum steps, with which it was delayed anyway. After all, the Government at first simply removed the Minister of Justice Herman Galushchenko and directed the State Audit Service to check the purchases of JSC NAEK Energoatom, which are mentioned in the investigation. It frankly looked like an attempt to protect “their own”.
Regarding the control measures of the State Audit Service, we doubt that the auditors will be able to do much. What they can really do is to check whether the condition of the objects built based on the results of these purchases corresponds to the acts of the completed works. That is, whether what was declared was really built there. This may be useful for the investigation. However, the auditors cannot in any way trace or confirm the “kickbacks”. They don’t even have the authority to identify overpayments. Their main goal is to ensure that purchases are made within the limits of the law.
Are purchases to blame The first reaction that can naturally arise is the thought that the problem is in procurement. In particular, purchases of protective structures for energy facilities appear on the tapes within the scope of the investigation. They are allowed to be carried out without the use of Prozorro – that is, directly. This exception was added to the procurement rules to expedite the construction of critical infrastructure protection. However, as it became known from the released films of the investigation, the criminal organization, on the contrary, delayed the construction in order to knock out its “kickbacks”.
But a similar scheme would also be possible at tenders. Prozorro is not an anti-corruption system. It is an electronic system in which purchases are made more efficiently and transparently. This transparency in particular means more chances to see corruption. However, we can see its indirect signs: discriminatory conditions, inflated prices, in which the margin for these “kickbacks” is hidden. Unfortunately, criminal organizations do not conduct “kickbacks” through the electronic public procurement system.
So would there be a better chance of spotting a problem with these procurements if they happened as tenders in Prozorro – yes. Would these “kickbacks” be noticeable – no.
System and people Corruption occurs where there are imperfections in the system that can be exploited and people who want to exploit them. Unfortunately, there are no perfect systems in the real world. No matter how much we improve the procurement rules, no matter how detailed they are, the rules cannot remove responsibility from those who implement them. Final decisions are always made by specific people.
To reduce the risks associated with this, before the selection of people for public positions principles of meritocracy should be applied. That is, people should get their positions through qualifications and achievements, especially when it comes to management roles. Unfortunately, what is happening now more like nepotism, that is, nepotism.
It is time to accept that the war is not likely to end anytime soon and should not be used as an excuse to avoid making the right decisions. People for management positions in state bodies should be selected based on the results of open competitions, rather than appoint directly.
We can see the results of such an approach in NABU and SAP, where the management is selected within the framework of open competitions. These bodies demonstrate the ability to perform their functions. Heads of state-owned enterprises and control bodies, such as the State Audit Service and the Chamber of Accounts, can and should be elected at open competitions. And it is important that these competitions are not just open, but also really effective: with adequate requirements, appropriate checks of qualifications and skills.
At the same time, these positions should provide adequate market salaries. Otherwise, we will not be able to attract truly worthy specialists to these positions. It is worth realizing that a managerial position in government structures is the same job as a managerial position in business. But also with greater responsibility and risks. And it should be paid accordingly.
Unfortunately, most civil positions are still filled by direct appointment, and salaries in the civil service are far from market. And this needs to be changed.
Of course, the positions of ministers are still political and it is impossible to spread open competitions for them. However, it should be understood that “rearranging beds” cannot be considered a change of Government in critical situations. The appointment of capable and honest specialists to these positions remains the responsibility of the Verkhovna Rada, and indirectly — of the Prime Minister and the President, who appoints the Prime Minister. And it is important that this choice is also made on the basis of meritocracy, not nepotism.
Exposing corruption is only the first step The investigation revealed I scheme of “rollbacks” in the field of energy caused a flurry and a lot of emotions. The story is being discussed in the media and social networks, headlines dominate the columns of international publications.
However, if you calm down your emotions a little, you need to think about what it really means and what to do with it.
Of course, the first steps after exposing corruption should be investigation, suspicions, sentences and responsibility. However, such stories always indicate the need for systemic changes. The scandal with “17 eggs” led to the reform of the field of defense procurement. Was this reform ideal – of course not. Did it get better – definitely yes.
This scandal should be taken as a sign that we can no longer tolerate nepotism. Public service, especially in important leadership positions, requires independence, both political and economic. This is necessary for efficiency.
Does this investigation show that the procurement, allegedly to speed up the construction of protective structures for critical infrastructure facilities, should be returned to a competitive course? Is there a security caveat after all?
Could the situation have been prevented by more effective external or internal controls? We have many questions to consider carefully.
Andriy Borovykexecutive director of Transparency International Ukraine
A column is a type of material that reflects exclusively the point of view of the author. It does not claim objectivity and comprehensive coverage of the topic in question. The point of view of the editors of “Economic Pravda” and “Ukrainian Pravda” may not coincide with the author’s point of view. The editors are not responsible for the reliability and interpretation of the given information and perform exclusively the role of a carrier.