Page 28 - bne_Magazine_March_2018

28 I Cover story bne March 2018
Lack of sentences
Sytnyk’s number one concern is the upcoming bill on the creation of a dedi- cated anticorruption court (ACC).
NABU is the investigative part of a trium- virate that also includes the Special Anti- Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO),
Sytnyk says, “but its creation has been controversial.”
President Poroshenko became only a reluctant supporter of the reform in late 2017, after the IMF made it clear it was a key condition for unlocking the next bailout loan. Ukraine has so far received
as for the country’s civil society – if not the only, then the most visible, success in Ukraine’s half-hearted fight against corruption.
“At the same time NABU was created,
a big reform of the prosecutor general and of the police were also launched,” says Daria Kaleniuk, executive director of the NGO Anti-Corruption Action Cen- tre. “Both failed. But NABU succeeded, partly because it’s a parallel structure built from scratch.”
NABU earned that backing in part thanks to a series of high-profile inves- tigations which, Sytnyk says, “showed NABU is an independent organ not afraid to investigate cases of corruption. It's a first in the history of Ukraine.”
Big fish
The agency sprang to international prominence after it indicted its first big fish, Roman Nasirov, the head of the State Fiscal Service and a close friend of Poroshenko, in March 2017. The indictment was the first time a senior active politician from the government’s inner circles had been pulled up on cor- ruption charges. Nasirov is accused of diverting some $75mn while restructur- ing tax debts. He denies the charges.
“Ukraine’s justice system is on trial,” wrote bne IntelliNews columnist Katya Kruk at the time, but unfortunately it has failed the test. Nasirov’s wife posted bail of over $3mn and while the case was supposed to go to trial last August, as of the time of writing nothing has happened.
The workload to close a single case involving a senior government official is considerable, and the sheer number of lower level officials that are also on
“International donors are becoming increasingly frustrated and cancelled the transfer of cash”
which carries out prosecutions in parallel with the General Prosecutor’s Office, but is also entirely independent from the government’s control. What is missing is a court to hear the cases investigated by NABU and prosecuted by SAPO that is also independent from the notoriously corrupt Ukrainian judicial system.
The courts were supposed to be reformed in 2017, but when the new system was announced Ukraine’s civil society was shocked to discover that
at least 25 of the 111 judges appointed were known to be corrupt. “The judicial reform has failed,” said Anders Aslund, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and usually one of Ukraine’s most outspoken supporters.
International donors are becoming increasingly frustrated and cancelled the transfer of cash at the end of last year until the anti-corruption court was set up.
Sytnyk says the ACC would solve the bureau’s main problem: the fact that the various officials it has investigated and arrested in the last few years have almost all been freed or received light sentences once they enter the notori- ously corrupt Ukrainian justice system. In the latest case, the arrest of Odessa mayor Hennady Trukhanov, suspected of embezzlement, was short lived as he was immediately released without bail pending his trial.
“The anticorruption court is the most important reform right now,”
www.bne.eu
only four out of 12 scheduled IMF pay- ments and it looks increasingly likely it will not receive any more money at all until the ACC is established.
For Sytnyk, the inability to capitalise on the bureau’s investigations has direct consequences: “It’s a big hit to the morale of our detectives,” he says. “They work, they work, they work, bring a case to the court, and nothing happens.” In a tired voice, Sytnyk alternates between praise for his “small but motivated team” and pessimism over the political situation.
Sytnyk, who comes over as a somewhat reluctant director, combines experience as a former head of investigations in the Kyiv regional prosecutor's office and apparent honesty: he resigned from his old job in 2011 after denouncing the “criminalisation of law enforcement agencies” under former president Viktor Yanukovych (according to his official biography). He was appointed director of NABU in April 2015.
Since then, as Ukrainian authorities have appeared less and less enthusiastic about the monumental task of tackling
“They work, they work, they work, bring a case to the court, and nothing happens”
corruption, NABU has become a poster child of what reforms should look like for Ukraine’s Western backers as well
the take multiplies it. But with only 700 employees (the maximum number set by law), NABU is a minuscule agency com-