There’s an urgent need to amend the norm of the Law of Ukraine «On the High Anti-Corruption Court», providing that appeal courts of general jurisdiction will consider appeals against decisions of the first-instance courts made before The High Anti-Corruption Court is established.
The information that the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (further referred to as NABU) allegedly stopped “proactively investigating Manafort” on political grounds, published by BBC on May 23rd 2018, is not true.
The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) categorically disagrees with the NACP`s (National Agency on Corruption Prevention) decision №1375 of December 18, 2017, in which the Agency interprets certain provisions of the Law of Ukraine «On Corruption Prevention» regarding the investigation of offences under Articles 366-1 and 368-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. According to the NABU, the proposed explanation of the NACP is legally unjustified and may help corrupt officials to evade criminal liability for illegal enrichment and submitting false data to e-declarations.
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.
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.
The Draft Law № 6232 on amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, adopted by Ukrainian Parliament in second reading on October 3, contains a number of contradictions that may paralyze the work of investigatory authorities in case the amendments to the Code come into force.