On December 6, 2017, some Members of Parliament (MPs) and politicians spread statements about the need to "establish parliamentary control" over the activities of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU). As a mechanism of "control", the representatives of two fractions of ruling coalition proposed the Draft Law that eliminates the guarantees of the NABU independence completely. In particular, the Draft Law simplifies the procedure for dismissal of the NABU Director by establishing the procedure of passing a no-confidence motion against him by a simple majority of votes in the Parliament. Also the same mechanism is proposed for dismissal for the Head of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) who conducts procedural guidance over the NABU investigations.
On December 5, 2017, the Deputy Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yurii Stoliarchuk gave notices of suspicion to two more employees of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU). The earlier detained NABU undercover agent was given notice of suspicion on November 30. The Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine (GPO) suspects the NABU employees of allegedly committing crimes under Article 369 (Offer, promise, or giving improper advantage to official) and Article 370 (Provocation of bribery) of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
The statements of the General Prosecutor of Ukraine about the alleged illegality of work of some units of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) do not reflect the reality and sometimes also belie the common sense. As Mr Lutsenko, judging by his statements, seems not to be fully aware of the basic legal principles of the operative search activities, we inform that all NABU’s operative and search activities are guided by the requirements of the Law "On the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine" and the Law "On Operative and Search Activities". According to Article 8 of the Law "On Operational and Search Activities", regular and freelance open and undercover employees can be involved in conducting operative and search activities.
In April 2017 the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) started an undercover operation to embed the special agent to an organized criminal group consisting of current and former officials of the State Migration Service of Ukraine (SMSU). According to the operational data, upon prior conspiracy, the officials of the SMSU demanded and received funds for providing to foreigners the citizenship of Ukraine, certificates for temporary residence in Ukraine, as well as for quickening the production of biometric passports for Ukrainian citizens.
The Prosecutor General`s Office of Ukraine (GPO) and the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU) illegally interfered with an undercover special operation of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau aimed at identifying members of an organized criminal group in the State Migration Service of Ukraine.
During her visit to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine on November 28, U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch said “the work of NABU and SAPO is important and not easy. Ukrainian people do want change. However, these changes will not happen without sentences in top-corruption cases. That is why the United States supports the idea of creating an Anticorruption Court in Ukraine.”
On November 24, 2017, the Detectives of the National Anti-Corruption of Ukraine (NABU) jointly with the employees of the Prosecutor General`s Office of Ukraine exposed a person who had offered an improper advantage in the amount of 800 thousand USD to the NABU employee.
The trials haven’t started yet regarding 34 of the criminal proceedings in which the Detectives of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine completed the pre-trial investigation and the prosecutors of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office sent the indictments to courts. In some cases, the trial hasn’t started for more than a year and a half. For example, in criminal proceeding, as of the case of officials of the Vasylkivska Regional State Administration of Kyiv Region, the trials have not begun yet and it lasts for more than a few months. At the same time, the scheduled court hearings didn`t happened for various reasons. The trial as of the case of the Director of Limited Liability Company (LLC) Zaporizhye Titanium and Magnesium Combine (accused of abusing of official position) has not been started for more than 12 months.
To establish professional relations at the international level and to learn the newest means and methods of combating corruption, the Director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) Artem Sytnyk jointly with law enforcement officers of European countries took part in the European Partners against Corruption (EPAC) and European contact-point network against corruption (EACN) 17th Professional Conference and session of the General Assembly. The events took place on November 15-17, 2017 in Lisbon, Portugal.
On November 15, 2017, the Detectives of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) under procedural guidance of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) conducted a number of searches. As a result, the person involved in embezzlement of funds allocated for the engineering and set up of the Ukrainian-Russian State Border, territories adjacent to the Anti-Terrorist Operation Zone and to Autonomous Republic of Crimea (also known as Ukrainian Wall or European Wall) was detained.
On November 10, 2017, indictments as of the Head of the State Fiscal Service of Ukraine (SFS) and the Head of the Debt Redemption Department of the SFS were sent to court by the prosecutors of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO). The Head of SFS is suspected of committing crimes under Part 2 Article 364, Part 1 Article 366 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (CCU) and the Head of the Debt Redemption Department of SFS is suspected of committing crimes under Part 5 Article 27, Part 2 Article 364 of the CCU. The pre-trial investigation in this criminal proceeding was completed on July 28, 2017. The suspects and the defense were getting aquainted with the documents of the pre-trial investigation for more than 3 months.