Page 8 - UKRRptNov20

manner at the summit (even putting demands on their European counterparts), the President’s Office is demonstrating its confidence that it has found the right geopolitical formula in dealing with both the West and Russia. This formula is based on the premise that Western leaders are so concerned about losing Ukraine (especially after this summer’s events in Belarus) that they are willing to look the other way on the Zelensky administration’s sins.
That wager proved true at the Oct. 6 summit in Berlin. But such grace on behalf of the Europeans is already starting to run thin, based on other statements and actions. Meanwhile, the report that Zelensky administration officials (likely Andriy Yermak) can’t handle criticism shows just how overwhelmed and incapable they are in their roles. At minimum, they should play the standard game of accepting criticism with a smile and assuring the Europeans they are doing everything they can to meet their expectations.
This refusal to face reality indicates Zelensky’s team is in a certain groupthink in which its members are convinced that its policies are justified and beyond reproach. They also think they can cover up its shortcomings by manipulating public opinion, even demanding that phrases such as “the E.U. is not a cash machine” be deleted from texts. This is quite disturbing, indicating the administration is in for a rude awakening eventually. The Oct. 25 local elections should serve as a strong signal along that path of lost public support.
2.3​ ​Scandalous court ruling immediately disrupts Ukraine anti-corruption infrastructure
The scandalous October 27 ruling overturning Ukraine’s system of electronic declarations of assets and income – widely recognized as the foundation for Ukraine’s fight against corruption – was published by the Constitutional Court on October 28. The text confirmed that the court indeed ruled as excessive the established punishment for filing knowingly fraudulent declaration, thereby requiring its immediate cancelation. And those affected state authorities confirmed that the ruling affects related legislation that (1) requires the online publishing of annual e-declarations of assets and income (though maintains the requirement of their annual filing), (2) defines the conditions of illegal enrichment and the confiscation of assets gained by such corruption and (3) establishes the authority of the National Agency of Corruption Prevention.
In particular, the October 27 ruling means it’s unconstitutional for citizens to have access to information on revenue, expenses and property on all those who are employed by state bodies, said Oleksandr Novikov, the head of the national agency. It prompted the National Agency on Corruption Prevention to shut down immediately its online register of electronic declarations, which had been a key source for lawyers, analysts and journalists in their anti-corruption investigations. The register won’t work until parliament approves a new bill granting the agency the authority to access the information again, he said.
The October 27 ruling “returns Ukraine not to 2013, but 1991, when no anti-corruption legislation existed even in theory,” Novikov told the pravda.com.ua​ news site. “It completely cancels all mechanisms for preventing corruption, which were built during the years of independence.” Another consequence of the October 27 court ruling was it blocked the national
8​ UKRAINE Country Report​ November 2020 ​ ​www.intellinews.com