[ad_1]
The Constitutional Court considers the decree on the appointment of Sytnyk unconstitutional (photo: Vitaliy Nosach / RBC-Ukraine)
The heads of the anti-corruption bodies were in a “state of suspension.” What will happen next with NABU and SAP? On the RBC-Ukraine material.
During the five years of their work, the NABU and SAP leaders have repeatedly manifested pressure from individual authorities and politicians. International partners have always reacted sharply to this, recalling that Ukraine’s financial support is directly dependent on the independence in the work of anti-corruption workers.
On Bankova Street, although these departments were occasionally criticized, they tried not to interfere directly with their activities. In the early fall of this year, both anti-corruption bodies were virtually “beheaded.” The head of the SAP, Nazar Kholodnitsky, resigned ahead of schedule and the Constitutional Court (CC) questioned the legitimacy of the director of the NABU, Artem Sytnik.
On the eve of the Constitutional Court, it recognized some of the articles of the NABU law as unconstitutional and gave the Verkhovna Rada three months to rectify the situation. Parliament should also unblock the selection of a new SAP director.
Controversial status
Artem Sytnik became the head of the Anti-Corruption Office according to the presidential decree of April 16, 2015. But at the end of August, the Constitutional Court established that this body should be subordinate to the Cabinet of Ministers and not to the president. Furthermore, the judges indicated that the Basic Law does not specify the right of the head of state to appoint the director of the NABU.
This Constitutional Court decision immediately received many interpretations, often directly opposed, from lawyers, law enforcement officials and politicians. Thus, in an official press release, the President’s Office called the head of NABU “interim” and asked the bureau’s leadership to take into account “new legal circumstances” in their work.
Part of the presidential faction “Servant of the People” (SN) urged Sytnik to follow Kholodnitsky’s example and write a letter of resignation. One of the initiators of the constitutional presentation, a deputy from SN Maxim Buzhansky, told RBC-Ukraine that from now on, the actions of the NABU director could be considered illegal and should lead to his criminal prosecution.
The Constitutional Court itself also hinted that Sytnyk should now be considered in office. office manager. It was in this state that he was invited to the session of the Constitutional Court on September 10, in which the law “On the National Anticorruption Bureau” was considered. Although Sytnik has not yet appeared in court, and the interests of NABU were represented by the head of the legal department.
“This is not a typographical error. In fact, the position of the Constitutional Court is that Sytnyk is the acting director,” a court source told RBC-Ukraine.
Sytnik himself, in turn, publicly described the decision of the Constitutional Court as “politically motivated”, although he did not specify which of the politicians lobbied for it. Resign or appoint a substitute. he does not intend to be an office manager.
“I want to emphasize that today NABU is working in a regular mode and the director of NABU Sytnik is working in a regular mode,” the head of the Anti-Corruption Office said on the air of the television program Freedom of Speech on September 15.
The head of the law enforcement committee of the Verkhovna Rada, Denis Monastyrsky (SN), is sure that the question of “personally Artem Sytnik” is not as important as the problem of legislative regulation of the procedure for appointing a new director by NABU.
According to him, the deputies continue to seek a consensus in this direction. On the other hand, the head of the committee referred to the possibility of criminal prosecution of Sytnik for acting as director of NABU after the decision of the Constitutional Court.
“With regard to the question of possible criminal prosecution (Sytnik, – ed.), so yes, I am convinced that there will be a proper appeal to law enforcement. But then the question of law enforcement agencies, how will they assess this situation, “Monastyrsky said in a comment on RBK-Ukraine.
At the same time, a group of deputies, together with the head of the Rada’s anti-corruption committee, Anastasia Radzina (SN), presented a bill in early September that changes the procedure for appointing the director of the NABU. The document could resolve the legal conflict that had arisen: the deputies propose to transfer to the Cabinet of Ministers the right to appoint the director of NABU. But it was never put to a vote in the session room.
“This initiative (introduction of a bill, – ed..) was Anastasia Radina, it was not approved by the Office of the President. In addition, the Office of the President is blocking the solution of this problem in every possible way, it is advantageous for them to have the director of NABU in a ‘suspended’ state “, said Yaroslav Yurchishin (” Golos “), first deputy director of the committee of profile and co-author of the bill.
In his opinion, the “beheading” of the main anti-corruption agencies is a deliberate strategy of the authorities, whose aim is to make security officials dependent on the leadership of the country.
The post was unable to obtain clarification from the Office of the President (OP) on the situation. Head of the judicial system, the deputy head of the OP, Andrei Smirnov, told RBC-Ukraine that the new deputy Oleg Tatarov is in charge of the Sytnik case. Tatarov did not respond to a request for comment.
And Zelensky’s representative in the Constitutional Court, Fedor Venislavsky, told the publication that a new bill has already been developed to amend the Constitution on this issue. It states that the president can appoint the director of NABU, but with the approval of parliament. The document will be presented to the Rada not on behalf of the head of state, but on behalf of 150 people’s deputies.
The lawyer also stressed that he has his own opinion on Sytnyk’s current legal situation. “After the decision of the Constitutional Court, he is an illegitimate director of the office. A different person, not Sytnik, but his deputy, must act as head of the NABU,” the presidential representative is sure.
Waiting for competition
After the removal of Kholodnitsky, the functions of the head of the SAP are carried out by his deputy Maxim Grischuk. The new full-fledged head of the Specialized Prosecutor’s Office and his alternates must be determined by the competition commission before November 30.
On June 4, the Council of Prosecutors filled its seat on this commission. It included three international experts in the field of anti-corruption (Thomas Firestone, Drago Kos and Nonna Tsotsoria) and a Ukrainian lawyer, member of the Council of Public Integrity Roman Kuybida.
The Verkhovna Rada should delegate seven more candidates to the competition commission. According to the law “De la Fiscalía”, it could do so until September 4. After this date, the commission formed by the first four members is considered plenipotentiary.
However, parliamentary attempts to cover their quota have so far failed. For example, on September 3, deputies were only five votes short of approving the candidates proposed by the law enforcement committee.
The main complaint of the opposition experts and deputies was that they all lack experience in fighting corruption. That is, this condition is detailed in the legislation as a mandatory characteristic of a member of the competition commission for the selection of the head of the SAP.
For example, the list of applicants includes retired police general Bogdan Romanyuk, lawyers Yekaterina Koval and Andrey Gudzhal, scientists Vyacheslav Navrotsky, Alexey Drozd and Yevgeny Sobol. None of them had experience working specifically in the area of anti-corruption.
According to an RBK-Ukraine source in the presidential faction, another attempt will be made on September 17 to “push” this list of candidates, and it “should definitely be successful.”
In addition, another source of the publication in the Ze-team assures that the authorities have already decided on the main contender for the position of head of the SAP. This is the deputy of the SN and the head of the legal policy committee Andrei Kostin. Before being elected to the Rada, he worked as a lawyer in Odessa.
Kostin himself responded evasively when asked by RBC-Ukraine if he would enter the competition for the position of chief anti-corruption prosecutor. “There are many interesting ideas in the press. An interesting idea is always cause for reflection,” said the deputy.
According to Yurchyshyn, international partners may consider the bidding commission and the head of the SAP to be politically compromised and reduce cooperation with the Ukrainian authorities. On September 3, the G7 ambassadors called on Ukraine to ensure a transparent procedure for selecting the leadership of anti-corruption bodies.
“The G7 ambassadors emphasize the need to select the heads of anti-corruption institutions through competitive, transparent, merit-based and politically neutral procedures,” the statement said. EU Ambassador Matti Maasikas also hinted that this is a necessary condition for Ukraine to maintain visa-free travel and receive macro-financial assistance from the EU.
The Ukrainian government assures that it has understood this signal from the Europeans and shares their concern about the situation around NABU and SAP.
“Obviously, this decision of the Constitutional Court regarding the NABU prompts us to modify the legislation. And this element is key. These changes must be developed, created and publicly discussed, I believe that all colleagues, politicians, officials, parliamentarians me they support this “. – said Deputy Prime Minister Olga Stefanishina in an interview with RBC-Ukraine.
***
Over the past five years, anti-corruption agencies have repeatedly become the target of criticism from politicians. Above all he was referring to the absence of “noisy landings” and the constant conflicts between security agents. However, any inclination of the authorities towards the replacement of Sytnik and Kholodnitsky failed and met, first, with the opposition of the western partners.
Now, the presidential team is emphasizing that “there is no need to rely on specific names” and insists that the personnel changes are not intended to violate the independence of the work of anti-corruption officials. However, these words are unlikely to convince international donors if they are not backed by real action in the near future.
