The anti-corruption structure is under attack: the work of NABU may be reduced to a minimum, while at the same time the political authoritarianism of the President’s Office will increase. These are the risks that experts are talking about when considering Vladimir Zelensky’s proposal to equate corruption with treason.
Vladimir Zelensky intends to propose to deputies of the Verkhovna Rada to equate corruption with high treason during martial law. The President believes that this will demonstrate Ukraine’s systemic fight against bribery.
Focus asked experts to explain what is behind Zelensky's proposal to increase punishment for corrupt officials and why this could destroy the anti-corruption structure.
Under the heading of secrecy
“Responsibility for corruption during war must indeed be inevitable without any exception. However, such a statement by the president is clearly the first dangerous step in the possibility of laying a legal basis for political authoritarianism on the part of the OP during wartime and destroying the anti-corruption infrastructure that the Kremlin does not like so much. It was about our anti-corruption institutions and, in particular, NABU, that Putin spoke in his address before the attack on Ukraine,” Martina Boguslavets, founder of the Institute of Legislative Ideas, tells Focus.
According to the expert, if corruption cases are equated to treason, the punishment for committing a crime during martial law will be from 15 years to life imprisonment with confiscation of property. At the same time, the SBU will be able to investigate cases, as provided for in Article 216 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine, which will minimize the work of NABU.
“The adoption of such proposals into law will allow cases of corruption of top officials to be transferred to the SBU. This will allow the intelligence services to fully control the investigation of these cases and will minimize the jurisdiction and independence of NABU, which will lead to an anti-corruption collapse, says Boguslavets.
The expert also adds that if the affairs of top officials who are suspected of corruption are dealt with by the special services, the investigation will be classified as a state secret, which means the public will not have the opportunity to follow the process.
“Now, unlike the SBU, NABU is obliged to work publicly within the framework of the Criminal Procedure Code. You and I will not have the opportunity to monitor investigations and counteract abuses by law enforcement agencies. This will allow the OP, through the control of the SBU, to imprison political opponents, while releasing “their own” from responsibility, and it is also closed,” notes Boguslavets.
Violation of an individual's rights
While there is no text of the bill, experts are only guessing what proposals to toughen punishment for corrupt officials will come from the Office of the President. One of the key points, according to media reports, may be the abolition of the alternative preventive measure in the form of bail, which, according to lawyer Rostislav Kravets, would be a violation of human rights.
“There are a large number of decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, which indicate that the absence of an unalternative preventive measure is a violation of human rights. I believe that this will lead to corruption in law enforcement agencies. We know how they work: they will lock up a person, hold him for six months in inhumane conditions, and then receive recognition that the suspect is a corrupt official and a state traitor,” continues Kravets.
According to Boguslavets, there are two real conditions, the fulfillment of which would lead to inevitable punishment for crimes, including corruption: bringing judicial reform to its logical conclusion and launching reform of law enforcement agencies.
“Especially during the war, as practice shows with the so-called “reform” and the cleansing of the prosecutor’s office and the police, which actually did not happen, we simply no longer have time to delay such changes. And it is precisely the distrust of these institutions that the latest independent surveys of Ukrainians indicate,” the expert adds.
The West may not appreciate it
Vladimir Zelensky’s political plan is clear, political analyst Oleg Posternak tells Focus. Ukrainians expect a concrete initiative from the authorities: preferably fast and effective. The President needs to distance himself from the numerous corruption scandals that have come to light during the war. However, instead of strengthening the independence of anti-corruption bodies, such as NABU and SAP, the authorities choose a simple method - to toughen punishment for committing crimes.
“The initiative itself will find a response in the souls of war-weary voters. It is clear that it will capture the image of the president as a person who is not ready to put up with outbreaks of corruption during the war, which affects the national security of the country and the motivation of military personnel, their attitude towards power. So the political intention is clear - the authorities are responding to the concerns of the electorate and at the same time showing their Western partners that we are fighting corruption,” Posternak tells Focus.
According to the analyst, previously the president could not afford a big anti-corruption war, as this created the basis for various opposition movements, which threatened his power. If he had actively fought against corrupt officials, he would have had to imprison many officials and politicians loyal to the OP. Therefore, the president chose balancing tactics, and only occasionally created hotbeds of a major anti-corruption fight, while not touching the people who threatened his power.
“Now the situation has changed. The President has to be more radical, bold and effective. Therefore, the government is looking for solutions that would allow citizens and European partners to say: “yes, the government is doing something,” the expert adds.
However, such a solution is unlikely to be truly effective, especially in the eyes of Western partners. The so-called law on de-oligarchization and the register of oligarchs caused shock and misunderstanding on the part of European institutions. The same thing can happen with the proposal to equate corruption with treason, Posternak notes.
