The investigation into top-level corruption in the judicial system, related to the recent exposure of the head of the Supreme Court, Vsevolod Knyazev, continues. Almost every week there are new reports about the detention or indictment of top officials. But for the last 10 years, during which new and independent anti-corruption bodies have been working in Ukraine: NABU, BEB, DBR, NAZK and SAP, none of the TOPs received a single real term. About the causes of this situation and the progress of the cases, which are being investigated today, the publication ZN.UA asked Oleksandr Klymenko, head of the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office.
When will the anti-corruption bloc strengthen the investigation of journalists about corruption in the Ministry of Defense? What about the suspicion of ex-prosecutor general Iryna Venediktova? Will Boris Kaufman and Oleksandr Granovsky sit down and will Gennadiy Trukhanov continue to rule Odesa? Does the case of ex-deputy chairman of the OPU Kirill Tymoshenko and his business partners Yury Golyk and Valentin Reznichenko have any prospects? Will the forces of the anti-corruption bloc be sufficient to fight corruption without a real reform of the law enforcement system, in which the authorities are not interested? How to make the SAP independent and on whom within the country, apart from the public and international partners, should the anti-corruption bloc rely?
— Mr. Oleksandr, even before the story with the "golden eggs" was published in our publication, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau was engaged in procurement schemes at the Ministry of Defense. When to expect the first results of the investigation?
— It is difficult to forecast because we are dealing with a huge amount of information. For each delivery of products, it is necessary to pick up the documentation, calculate its quantity, and after that establish its value and calculate the total amount of damages. But the proceedings are very active. It is under the control of both the management of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office and the management of NABU.
— Yes, maybe we need to strengthen the case with detectives and prosecutors? Because there is a great dissonance when the halls of various forums welcome the Minister of Defense Oleksiy Reznikov with applause, while detectives are investigating the corruption of MoD purchases for 409 positions. Not mine, by the way, the numbers are those of Andrii Kaluzhynskyi, the chief detective of NABU.
— But there is a presumption of innocence. We have to collect the proper evidence, confirm whether there was a crime, and then speak. Although in any case we will always lag behind those who commit crimes. Committing a crime is much easier than collecting and proving everything later.
— Therefore, the anti-corruption bloc is based on the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption. We had a large amount of information about how the Ministry of Defense prevents corruption, which, in fact, we talked about in an interview with the head of the NAZK Oleksandr Novikov. Mr. Reznikov, together with his deputy for finance, Rostislav Zamlynskyi, and adviser Andrii Myroshnychenko, who hails from the now-defunct "Hospital of the Future", cleared all audit and anti-corruption departments of the MoD from outsiders. With the resignation of Vyacheslav Shapoval and Bohdan Khmelnytskyi, the Ministry of Defense has not been freed from corruption and continues to harm our army.
— Unfortunately, the Ministry of Defense constantly creates various schemes that are used to make money. There are enough examples. Among the memorable ones: when a company offers a large list of food products to be supplied, it has a price both well above the market price for the most popular items, such as potatoes and carrots, and well below the market price for those products , which in practice do not reach the soldiers. And if you take the average price, you will get an adequate percentage that the grocery set will cost approximately this or that amount. But then are starting diva: the company wins the tender due to the low price offered, but actually supplies only the most expensive products. And the cheapest ones she had in the catalog were not.
We have a large number of proceedings regarding this ministry. Purchases of weapons, means of protection, contracts for repairs. However, an inflated price does not always indicate corruption, because in some cases, when weapons and ammunition were purchased, they were simply not sold at a lower price in Ukraine. There can be many reasons. At the beginning of the war, they were generally afraid to supply weapons to Ukraine, so they were repurchased from intermediaries. Plus, cases are not excluded when Russia intervenes in this market and deliberately raises the price or buys out Ukrainian contracts.
— Filtering?
— Yes, and this is such a sensitive process. But we plan to have results by the end of the year.
— Do you investigate cases of overdue MoD receivables? The 8,9 billion hryvnias announced by the ministry is not all. In response to the request of the Anti-Corruption Center, the Ministry of Finance confirmed 36(!) billion hryvnias of receivables of the Ministry of Defense.
— I cannot say whether we have information about all such suppliers of the Ministry of Defense, but some of them are under active investigation. Where the facts are confirmed that the funds were paid - 100% advance payments, and the weapons were not delivered.
— And this could be a scheme of the Ministry of Defense?
- So. Therefore, we are now establishing why contracts were concluded with these companies, why a XNUMX% advance payment was made, and whether there is a corruption component and abuse. Perhaps this is not an exception and this is such an economic relationship. It often happens that the party has not fulfilled the contracts, and the MoD, as part of other processes, applies for the recovery of the funds that were paid. In some cases, there are real companies that actually sell weapons or ammunition or even are manufacturers, but they did not fulfill the contract due to objective reasons. Let's figure it out.
— The case of ex-prosecutor general Iryna Venediktova. In December, in an interview with our publication, NABU chief detective Andriy Kaluzhinsky confirmed that the agency is continuing its investigation into the fact of interference in the activities of the prosecutor, which could have prevented the serving of suspicion to the judges of the liquidated District Administrative Court of Kyiv in the case of the tapes of the head of the court, Pavlo Vovka. Half a year has passed, how far has the investigation progressed and is the suspicion real?
— These proceedings have no prospects. And they are not under the jurisdiction of NABU.
- Why?! Kaluzhinskyi said that all the materials were returned to NABU. Where and why are these matters now? Who made the decision? Please explain here the position of SAP in detail.
— Yes, indeed, we demanded from other bodies all criminal proceedings on the specified fact, one case, if I am not mistaken, from the Security Service, and the other from the State Bureau of Investigation. The third was under the investigation of NABU detectives. According to the results of their study, it was established that the statute of limitations for criminal prosecution has expired for some of the episodes, since the actions provided for in Article 343 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (interference in the activities of a law enforcement officer) are not a crime, but only a misdemeanor. The statute of limitations for prosecution for a misdemeanor is only two years, in some cases three years. And the criminal proceedings related to the events that took place in the summer of 2020. The only "live" in these criminal proceedings was the episode of unauthorized recording of the conversation of the prosecutors of the Prosecutor General's Office in one of the restaurants in Kyiv. Such actions are a crime and are qualified under Article 359 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
But, in my opinion, any result of the investigation of these criminal proceedings will not lead to the referral of the case to court. Even if I am wrong, and it will be sent to court by some other body, then this court will definitely not be the High Anti-Corruption Court, since none of the articles are corrupt, which means that they are not subject to investigation by NABU and are not subject to prosecution by VAKS. We ourselves are talking about the fact that everyone must comply with the requirements of Article 216 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine regarding liability.
In all these episodes, the prosecutor determined responsibility for another body of pre-trial investigation in accordance with the requirements of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.
- Where is Venediktova's phone? And if I'm not mistaken, he was in Oleksandr Omelchenko's unit as evidence. Probably, Madam Ambassador, reading this now, feels like a winner. And Bankova can be proud of the fact that she kept her word. I will not comment on what the public feels.
— Yes, such proceedings really exist, registered, it seems, in January 2022. And it does have a phone, it does not belong to the previous attorney general, but according to the materials of the criminal proceedings, it should have stored a number of records relating to the conversations of the previous attorney general. The content of these conversations is currently unknown to me.
After my appointment to the position, I studied and listened to all criminal proceedings, and during the hearing of Omelchenko's department, it was established that in one of the proceedings, entered into the Unified Register of Pretrial Investigations for the fact of interference, but already in the activities of the Prosecutor General, there is a telephone on which there are recordings of conversations that unidentified persons used allegedly to influence the previous prosecutor general.
During the wiretapping, it became clear that the phone is outside the borders of the SAP and NABU. According to prosecutors, he was kept away from Kyiv because of the war. After a few days, the phone appeared in the materials of the criminal proceedings, it was blocked, and the password for the phone disappeared. According to the prosecutors, they either did not listen to the recordings before sending them for examination, or simply forgot their content.
Expert of the Kyiv Research Institute of Forensic Expertise (head Oleksandr Ruvin. — I.V.), who conducted the examination, also does not remember the password from the phone, the content of the conversations that were on the recordings, he does not remember, and he cannot explain why the content of the conversations was not reflected in the examination itself.
The detectives of the NABU unit (we are talking about the unit under the leadership of Boris Indichenko. — I.V.), who conducted the pre-trial investigation in this proceeding, as well as their leaders, were also unable to explain anything about the phone or the proceedings in general. This happened even before the appointment of a new director of the bureau.
After establishing these facts, the group of prosecutors and the group of detectives were changed, and the phone was handed over to NABU for unlocking. Currently, according to my information, in the case of the former general prosecutor himself, they have not been questioned about the details and circumstances. The phone is already unlocked, and we need to establish the content of the records, their authenticity and the absence of unauthorized interventions in the phone to change or replace the specified records, the investigation is ongoing. But there are really a lot of strange coincidences in the case, which are even more like regularities. Therefore, it is possible that the actions of the detectives and the prosecutor will also have to be investigated in this case.
- Thank you. Let's talk about Odessa. There is also something to talk about here. Will Gennady Trukhanov be suspected in the case of Boris Kaufman — Oleksandr Granovsky?
— I will definitely not announce a report of suspicions. The matter is being investigated. We are actually finalizing what we had left and proceeding to the conclusion of the investigation. Will there be any more suspicions in this case? I think not yet.
— It has been known since the time of Oleksandr Angert and Volodymyr Galanternik that Mayor Trukhanov is a very careful business partner. And, of course, he did not visit Kaufman's bunker. His "right hand" - Mykhailo Kuchuk - went there. And two more deputies. Which, by the way, we wrote in detail just a few days ago. And they did not speak as part of the agreement with the investigation? As well as developers who signed "memorandums" for a ten percent kickback with Kaufman and Granovsky.
- A very strong group of detectives is working in this criminal case, it is really being actively investigated, it is not standing still, but I cannot reveal more details so as not to harm the investigation.
In order for us to be more effective in cases like this, it is important to restart the institution of agreements. We want to be able to conclude agreements with those involved in order to get to the ultimate beneficiaries and beneficiaries of corruption schemes and "fix" them as much as possible. Because mostly there is a hierarchy and there is a person who controls the whole process. But we reach some managers and deputies and very often do not reach the top. The legislation is written in such a way that the manager signs an agreement with the investigation to expose the profiteer, but with the possibility of receiving a punishment in the form of seven years of imprisonment. Few people agree to such terms of the agreement, or rather, no one agrees. This creates a circular bond. It is necessary to be able to apply a lower punishment than that provided for by the sanction of the article in corruption crimes.
— But there may be abuses on the part of the prosecutors who, after signing the agreements, will begin mass exonerations from responsibility.
— There is judicial control over this, which checks both public interests and the legality of the punishment applied or proposed in the agreement. This tool works throughout the civilized world.
— Kaufman often visited Bankova, and ex-head of the Security Service of Ukraine Ivan Bakanov at one time, on the instructions of the president, helped the owner of "Tedis Ukraine" in resolving the conflict with the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine in the story of 3,4 billion hryvnias, for which the AMCU fined the tobacco company in the fall of 2019. I am talking about the fact that there is no preserved corruption at the level of the city or region. Are you tracking other possible lines in any way? Left, right, up? Maybe it will be beneficial for Kaufman to make a deal on the existing terms?
— The investigation is conducted based on the fact of the committed crime, and not on a specific person. This is a slightly different situation. We can't take a person and find out what possible crimes they've ever committed. We have a specific activity of a certain criminal organization that laundered funds from the Odesa city budget. We are investigating this fact and, as part of this proceeding, informed the persons of suspicion.
— Returning to the "lucky man" Trukhanov. In the "Krayan" case, everything is not so smooth for him. Although, also, how to look. Our courts, on the order of the office of the President of Ukraine, remove mayors from their positions: one took his wife abroad in a company car, another wrote out financial assistance to an assistant who had previously contributed 24 hryvnias to his election fund. But it is in Chernihiv and Rivne. But in Odesa, the one who got hold of the plant and plus can influence the investigation - no. SAP was going to make a submission to VACS regarding the removal of the mayor of Odesa from his post. Why didn't they do it? Moreover, why was Trukhanov's bracelet removed? Has the SAP applied for an extension of the official's preventive measure?
— This is one of those proceedings pending in court. For a very long time, a preparatory court session has not been held. For various reasons. We analyzed them. The prosecutor prepared a number of motions, some of them were granted. By the way, preventive measures have been changed for several defendants, and we hope that in connection with such measures, this case will begin to be heard. But I do not think that the only reason for delays is the burden on the court. We are also working in this direction, we will activate the line of consideration of cases in court.
Regarding suspension. It is also necessary to prove the risks and give them a proper justification. At the moment, it is difficult for me to say how we will act in this situation, we will look at the behavior of the participants in the process. That is, if the risks of influencing the course of the case through the use of the position are really confirmed, we will take measures.
Regarding the preventive measure, the prosecutor filed a request to extend the term of the duties in advance, namely on June 16, 2023, but this request was never considered by the court, as one of the judges of the panel was on vacation. The term of office expired on July 5, 2023. We will initiate a reimposition of duties on the accused before the court.
About pending cases, "Great construction" and expertise as state sabotage
— "Krayany", OASK, Zlochevskyi, Alperin, "Privat", "amber case" ... A little more, and the people involved in these cases, known throughout the country, will finally believe in impunity.
- Yes, this is a problem. There are cases where for more than 3,5 years not even a preparatory court session has taken place. There are very different cases of VAX meetings being disrupted, which we have also analyzed. We had many meetings with the procedural heads of these cases, plus prosecutors changed there, because those who supported the prosecution were now being mobilized. But we hope that things will be intensified. By the way, the cases concerning the "Krayan" plant (preparation lasts for more than 2,5 years) and amber (for more than 3,5 years) are heard by the same board of the VAKS.
— Is this a hint about the quality of the collegium? Do you somehow communicate with the head of VAX on this topic?
— We do not question the integrity of any VAKS board. As far as I know, VAKS constantly presents certain initiatives to the parliament in order to improve the legislation and prevent the prolongation of court proceedings. The court needs effective tools.
— That is, the ball is in the field of the specialized committee, which is headed by Mr. Ionushas and where, by the way, draft law No. 5661, which partially solves this problem, has been lying for the second year?
— We have a number of practices and recipes, and I know that VACS also has them, but at the moment it seems that these issues are not relevant for the parliament.
— It is obvious that Odesa is not an exception to the rules. But how big is everything? How many such local stories do you consider? Have the detectives reached the shadow office of Kyiv, which is managed by Denys Komarnytskyi, a well-known student of Chernivtsi? Which, by the way, economically suits both Klitschko and Yermak.
— Criminal proceedings regarding corruption at the local level have been opened in many cities. They are being actively investigated. And we are talking not only about regional centers, but also about smaller cities, which are also subject to our investigation.
— That is, visitors to bunkers across the country should remember this?
- So. But we must not forget that this situation can become even more large-scale and cynical, when funds for reconstruction go not only to large state programs, but also to large cities. Therefore, it is necessary to be ready to investigate a larger number of such facts.
— The case of Reznichenko-Holyk-Timoshenko within the case of the Dnipro Oblast. Is the list of those involved correct? Is there a prospect here?
— As part of this proceeding, a number of examinations are currently being conducted in order to establish the probable extent of the damage caused. The circle of all involved persons is only being established. Therefore, I cannot say anything more about the case. And the perspective depends on what evidence we collect. And it is in almost every case.
- But in every case, "downpours" happen.
— Such risks are more threatening to cases that begin to be documented secretly. For example, bribes, etc. Even in the case of the suspicion of the head of the Ternopil Regional Council and two deputy heads of the OVA of the same region, we had a leak of information. Therefore, we had to wait for a certain period of time to put our vigilance to sleep. And it worked — the people involved returned to criminal activity, and we realized it after that. But equally, in my opinion, this leak prevented us from documenting the involvement of one more high-ranking official. By the way, the source of the leak was never established. Unfortunately, this happens quite often due to the fact that the SAP is not an independent body and we still do not have an independent hearing of those involved. But where the fact has already been recorded, an official investigation is underway, the risks of harm are not so great.
— And "Big Construction" with almost the same number of people?
— Here everything rests on expertise. Conducting examinations in the construction and technical or land sector is the most difficult, as they last the longest and the queue for them is the longest. Even now, experts are extensively involved in damage assessment within the scope of the law on compensation for destroyed or damaged housing. There were difficulties even before the war - the queue stood for years, but now there are even more of them.
— And deadlines are running out... What to do with it? With a custom examination, with a queue without priorities? With rubies? This has been a diversion at the state level for a long time.
— This question is no longer for me, but for the Minister of Justice. This ministry certifies experts and supervises the quality of work of expert institutions. But I don't think that the state has any objective reasons not to bring order in this area after so many years. The problems for all parties are obvious. We appoint an examination in one institution, and a defense in another. As a result, we have several examinations in one case. Often with mutually exclusive conclusions. Plus, in various proceedings, in various bodies, examinations are also ongoing on the same fact. It is chaos and a field for abuse.
About the KPK, which does not punish, the inside of the government and the problems of extradition of Bakhmatyuk and Co
— Here you are talking about the recovery and possible increase in the number of abuses of donor money. But it is necessary to be ready to respond to it not only to the anti-corruption bloc, which has a little more than two thousand anti-corruption fighters in NAZK, NABU, SAP and VAKS. We have another 150 employees of the law enforcement system and prosecutor's office. The authorities are not interested in reforming them, as well as in honest expert institutions operating on the basis of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. This is profitable: as soon as something needs to be decided with the mayor, he pulled the leash and the security guards went to the offices, he decided - a fight. Manual control of security forces is the basis for the emergence of such cases as in Odesa.
— In order for the law enforcement system to work properly, it is necessary for the heads of the law enforcement system to be people appointed based on the results of independent competitions. So that a person comes to office and owes nothing to anyone. That she has no contingent obligations to anyone who appointed or recommended her for this position. Then it will work. In addition, the law enforcement system needs to be given criminal procedural legislation that really works.
- Here it is worth more details.
— An effective mechanism is needed so that the person who committed the crime can be brought to justice and the violated right restored. In our country, this system does not work, because for a long time before the PDA, changes were made manually for a specific situation, a specific case, and a person. After that, there were amendments regarding the terms of the investigations, which, in principle, do not happen anywhere in the world. It is about the terms of investigation in actual criminal proceedings. That is, criminal proceedings have been registered for the commission of a crime, there is a certain period for its investigation, but if you did not identify the person who committed this crime within this period, or you did not have time to collect all the evidence in the case and the investigating judge did not extend this period, the case has be closed And it is actually closed and the crime is not investigated further, no one is to blame, and it does not matter that the amount of damages can be in the billions.
In my opinion, the period of investigation in such criminal proceedings can be limited only by the statute of limitations for prosecution, as in other civilized countries. The presence of such time periods gives rise to different practices in the order of their calculation in different criminal proceedings and in different situations - during the consolidation of proceedings, after the cancellation of the resolution on closure, in the conditions of martial law and before it, etc.
This is nonsense. First, they change what did not need to be changed, and then they also "improve"... This is what the previous parliament did, and the current one is doing the same. There was already an attempt to amend Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which would have buried half of our cases and allowed abuse with impunity.
— Are you talking about draft law No. 8235, among the authors of which is the head of the law enforcement committee, Serhiy Ionushas?
- Unfortunately. It is not so much about the bill itself, as about individual amendments to it, submitted already in the process of consideration to the second reading, as far as I understand. But there is no need to improve anything here, it is simply necessary to cancel the terms of investigation in actual criminal proceedings. And everything will fall into place. Just as in order to make it impossible to delay cases, it is necessary to clarify only a few norms in the Code of Criminal Procedure.
— There is another problem: in every protracted case, we have a person involved who is hiding abroad. However, it is not the law enforcement committee, but the international partners who have a strange position here.
— There are two reasons for refusing extradition. First of all, the conditions of detention of prisoners in Ukraine are inadequate. European courts refer to the fact that this is a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. Secondly, with the beginning of the war, the fact that the state cannot guarantee security on its territory was added. No one is safe from the fact that at some point a missile can fly anywhere.
- And what are the options? Three human lives will not be enough for us to rebuild our penitentiary system.
- It is possible to guarantee on behalf of the state that the extradited persons will be kept in proper conditions, and invite inspectors who will check this. Regarding the war, it can be guaranteed that those involved in these cases will be detained in the western regions of Ukraine. We have Zakarpattia Oblast, where there was no shelling. We always talk about it with representatives of other countries on any platforms. Our biggest problems are extradition and asset recovery. Asset recovery is possible after we have a final court order. And for us, the extradition of criminals is a guarantee of the inevitability of punishment. Otherwise, you can commit a serious crime of corruption in Ukraine, leave, and you will never be extradited. Here, a tough position of the state is needed, and we have an iron argument for this: one of the conditions for joining the EU and NATO is an effective fight against corruption. Without a truly effective extradition mechanism, we are engaged in imitation.
— Throughout the interview, we have constant references to the specialized committee, then to the authorities, then to the state. And all in milk. On whom should the anti-corruption bloc rely in its fight?
— Civil society, certain public organizations, as well as international partners who see our problems and negotiate with their governments have been and are our only and constant partners.
— That is, there is currently no internal platform in the state where anti-corruption tools and improvement of legislative procedures could be effectively discussed?
- I do not see. The power of the anti-corruption committee without the support of a specialized one to solve problems is unfortunately lacking, although the anti-corruption committee helps us within its powers. In any case, if there is another site, we are not invited there, since SAP is not a separate institution. Even the discussion of draft laws passes us by, because we are just a structural unit. If they are invited, then the Office of the Prosecutor General or NABU.
About SAP dependency, the rejected draft law and the non-working working group in the specialized committee
— One of the demands of the IMF to Ukraine is the strengthening of the autonomy of the SAP. Now you and I touched — I don't see. The power of the anti-corruption committee without the support of a specialized one to solve problems is unfortunately lacking, although the anti-corruption committee helps us within its powers. In any case, if there is another site, we are not invited there, since SAP is not a separate institution. Even the discussion of draft laws passes us by, because we are just a structural unit. If they are invited, then the Office of the Prosecutor General or NABU. deep problems that exist in the law enforcement system, and which the SAP is a part of administratively and procedurally. What is your plan to become a full-fledged and self-sufficient link of the anti-corruption bloc?
— The way we see reforming the SAP is outlined in draft law No. 8402, which is supported by the anti-corruption committee and its head, Anastasia Radina. She is one of the authors of the draft law. Since 2015, nothing has changed in the legislation regarding SAP. Of course, it was impossible to do everything perfectly at once. But over the years, almost all processes have been run. Therefore, for each step that we propose in our plan, we have an argument: this is where it didn't work and this is what needs to be done to make it work.
If we are talking about contests for the position of the head of the SAP and prosecutors, then we must understand that the selection conditions are far from ideal. If we talk about SAP prosecutors and heads of departments, we need to have a realistic assessment of their activities. So that it does not happen that one prosecutor qualitatively investigates ten cases, and the other - half as many and nothing.
If we look even more broadly, the SAP should go through a real reform, become an independent legal entity, where an independent audit can be conducted. Here they say that Klymenko is ineffective, works poorly, puts pressure on prosecutors. What shall I do? Who to listen to? Only an independent commission that will conduct an independent audit, as is possible in NABU and other authorities. But currently it is not possible in SAP. In other words, I want the legislation to include a rule on a truly independent commission that came, checked, and compiled a report based on the audit results, and that this report was the basis for dismissal if the manager is ineffective according to transparent and publicly understandable criteria. Point.
— Unfortunately, even in the competition for the post of NABU director, where there were almost ideal conditions and the prevailing voice of international experts, surprises happened during the run-in.
- Nothing is perfect, because there is always a human factor. But the system must be built correctly. Plus, it will be possible to judge the results of the competition for the post of NABU director at least after a year. However, all decisions of this competition were made in accordance with the procedure and within the time limits specified by the legislation. And the competition for the head of the SAP lasted almost two years. No one understood the reasons for his permanent postponement. All this time, SAP, in fact, did not have an independent leader. After all, it is simply impossible to talk about the independence of the Prosecutor General, who, according to the law, performs the duties of the head of the SAP in his absence. Prosecutor General is a political position. And in fact, the body, which a priori should be independent, is managed by a politically appointed person. Therefore, if we are really fighting corruption, and not pretending, it is unacceptable to leave the SAP under the wing of the OGPU.
— Where is the most problematic area under the wing?
— Confidentiality. Yes, we have achieved certain results even within these limits. If earlier two out of ten procedures were successful, now four out of ten are without any problems. But six is always a critical leak. And this is a big number. In conditions of limited opportunities, it is difficult to find sources of information flows. If NABU has an internal control department and can conduct integrity checks there, it is much more difficult for us. To determine that the leak is definitely not from SAP, we need to carry out an inspection. This requires tools and a separate unit that will deal with it. The SAP does not have such a unit, we are a structural unit of the Prosecutor General's Office and use all the tools of the OGPU.
A similar situation is with the registration of correspondence. If you bring any document or statement to the SAP, they will first be transported to Riznytsia, registered there, and only then returned to us. And here, to put it mildly, there are certain nuances. Plus the budget. Yes, formally we have a separate budget, but we do not actually manage it. We do not have an accounting department, nor departments that carry out procurement, etc.
— What tools do you lack to adjust the team so that it meets the tasks of SAP? Does the draft law provide for re-certification of working prosecutors?
— Re-certifications — no, but the introduction of a certain system of evaluation of the prosecutor's work is foreseen. The one that exists now is formal and tied more to what bonus the prosecutor will receive. That is, today there are no clear criteria for evaluating the efficiency of employees. Plus, we consider it possible to implement a system of automatic distribution of cases between prosecutors. That, against the background of increased responsibility of the prosecutor, will ensure their complete independence within the scope of the tasks assigned to the SAP.
But this is all about the future. Currently, there is a SAP team that was formed before my appointment. We only got seven new positions at the end of last year. 13 prosecutors serve in the ranks of the Armed Forces, which creates a huge burden on each prosecutor. But currently there are no global problems in the team that existed before the appointment of the manager. There are no constant wars with NABU regarding every criminal proceeding. There is a common understanding of the tasks, which is already a great achievement.
Are we working efficiently? Given the resource we have, it is effective. Can we work more efficiently? Yes, we can! This requires a number of legislative changes. After all, the main result of the work of the anti-corruption bloc is the sentencing of those guilty of corruption. It is already obvious: in order for our cases to move faster, we need to increase the number of VAKS judges. Because their workload has increased by 35 percent in the last year alone. And it will constantly grow, because we send more cases to the court than they consider.
There are several options for increasing the bandwidth of the anticorsud. It is possible either to create more panels, or to give them the opportunity to consider the case individually in the court of first instance. That is, it will actually triple the number of meetings. And if this happens, SAP must also manage to increase its staff, since we will not be able to cover all meetings with the current team.
Plus the future reorganization of NABU in the event that it is possible to pass a draft law on NABU, increasing the bureau's staff, and creating its own expert institution. It is necessary to respond qualitatively and quantitatively to SAP in the context of future changes. If you think about the result, of course.
— But all these arguments were not enough for the profile committee? The draft law on the reform of the SAP, for which even the IMF is waiting, was rejected precisely at his level.
- So. When we tried to develop the best model for the existence of SAP, we involved certain international experts, including the European Anti-Corruption Initiative. Such a model was found and laid out in draft law No. 8402. Why was he not supported? Probably, because no one wants institutional and procedural independence of SAP. After all, we propose to increase the powers of the SAP and provide the possibility for the head of the SAP to enter information about people's deputies into the EDPR. And this is already a blow to political corruption.
— Unfortunately, not a single case of political corruption was investigated in the parliament. Not a single envelope of financial assistance to deputies from the ruling party became evidence in court. Former NABU director Artem Sytnyk spoke about systemic downpours. You are, in fact, talking about blocking investigations at the level of the Prosecutor General.
— Here is the complexity of documenting this type of crime, and the limited tools we have. Mostly, the problem lies in operational work, in how efficiently and qualitatively it can be carried out. Currently, NABU is not able to carry out wiretapping on its own. That is, all the cases we have are without the use of this tool. We don't tap phones.
— What is the percentage of possible efficiency realization now? And what would happen if this tool was in NABU and worked?
— I cannot reveal to you all available forms and methods of work. But it would definitely help us to give the head of the SAP the authority to enter data on people's deputies into the EDPR. Because today we do not introduce them. We prepare and initiate before the Prosecutor General.
— And how often does the general prosecutor refuse SAP?
— So far, from what SAP was preparing, there was no such case.
— And from what NABU was preparing? Give examples that give you reasons to claim that the OGPU blocks the entry of such information into the register.
— NABU does this directly to the OGPU, I do not know these figures. But if we want high-profile cases of political corruption, information about the beginning and progress of such cases should remain within the walls of NABU and SAP.
- Did you discuss these issues with Mr. Kostin? In general, how does the Prosecutor General perceive the ambition for complete independence of the SAP?
— Unfortunately, we did not discuss in detail the points of the draft law or possible changes. The Prosecutor General is of the position that the SAP reform should be returned to after the end of the war and our victory. To practice the best model of work later. But I believe that this is the wrong way. NABU, SAP and NAZK, like all state authorities, must be ready for the reconstruction process. And not to start preparing when the money has already gone and the reconstruction will begin.
But this is not just my opinion or ambition. This is one of the tools that will ensure the trust of international partners in Ukraine. They should see that anti-corruption agencies work effectively, protect their funds, and not imitate violent activity. And you don't have to go far for examples. After the rejection of draft law No. 8402 by the specialized committee, on the initiative of its chairman, a decision was made to create a working group with the participation of international experts. We have already received a proposal to submit a candidate for work in the group several times. We provide, but the group will not start working.
— And yet, after analyzing the problems of the institution and returning to the beginning of our conversation. I do not believe that you are not worried about the conflict with Omelchenko. Regarding relations with NABU. Regarding the role and place of the SAP in the antikorblok. What do you fall asleep with today?
- Of course, I'm worried. I am a human being. But as a professional, I am sure that I perform my duties in this position honestly and conscientiously, so I have nothing to worry about. I see the main task as being able to reform the SAP and the anti-corruption prosecutor's office becoming an independent institution that cannot be influenced either from the inside or from the outside. Will we show results? So. And I am sure that even before the end of the year we will have quite interesting things.
To always be aware of the most important things, read us at Telegram
