The primary problem and obstacle on contemporary Ukraine’s economic development is corruption.
Back in June of 2016, when the Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges” was adopted, the so-called High Anti-Corruption Court was introduced in the Ukrainian law. It has been over a year since then, but the court remained on paper only. What is the High Anti-Corruption Court then, why has it not been set up yet and do Ukrainians need it?
The main problem and obstacle on contemporary Ukraine’s way to economic development is corruption. All Ukrainian politicians talk about it on the news, as do Ukraine’s European and American partners during negotiations on providing Ukraine with another financial aid package, old ladies on benches and even kids in the streets.
Corruption has turned into some kind of an invincible dragon whom everyone fights and tries to destroy, but ends up only slightly scratching with a kitchen knife.
The whole thing got moving in 2014-2015 – that was when a whole range of new governmental bodies aimed at complete and unconditional victory over corruption were created in Ukraine.
The unreformed judiciary deliberately delays court trials on NABU cases.
The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) is a law enforcement agency responsible for prevention, identification, suppression and solution of corruption-related crimes.
The Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office is an independent structural unit of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine responsible for support of public prosecution in proceedings on cases investigated by the NABU.
The National Agency for Prevention of Corruption (NAPC) is a central executive body which develops and implements the national anti-corruption policy, has a preventative function, including inspection of declarations of public officials.
It would seem like all of this should be enough to make the fight against corruption fruitful, right? In reality, everything turned out much harder.
NABU, as a newly created independent law enforcement body, was off to a slow start, but during the past year, it has started proving its effectiveness. The Bureau started to open criminal proceedings against top-level officials of ministries and other central executive bodies, MPs, judges… Many of the officials suspected of corruption are close to the President and his team, which makes a significant negative impact on the image of the incumbent authorities. As of August 31 of this year, the NABU detectives were engaged in pre-trial investigation on 398 criminal proceedings. The total amount of crimes that are now being investigated by the Bureau exceeds UAH 87 billion.
However, out of 86 cases referred to the court by NABU and SAP, decisions have been made only on 23, with 17 convictions in legal force. The trial has not yet started on one third of the cases in which the NABU detectives completed the pre-trial investigation, and the SAP prosecutors SAP the indictment to the court.
Unfortunately, the unreformed judiciary delays the court proceedings on NABU cases. While the general statistics shows that only 1.2% of proceedings on criminal offenses are delayed in courts, this number exceeds 40% for NABU cases. The cases remain without trial for 4-12 months, which is hardly a reason for optimism. Politically dependent judges use any possible leverage to delay the consideration of top-level corruption cases.
Thus, only creation of a truly independent and professional judicial body – the High Anti-Corruption Court (HAC) can solve the problem.
The High Anti-Corruption Court will work only on the cases investigated by the NABU and SAP, providing fast and efficient proceedings. The candidates for the positions of judges will be selected at an open and transparent competition involving international partners in the jury. The court should include an independent Appeal Chamber, and the judges should be provided with high remuneration and an adequate level of security for themselves and their family members.
The creation of anti-corruption chambers in existing courts, which is the option that Ukrainian authorities insist on, will not only fail to solve the problem of ineffectiveness and dependency of court proceedings but will also discredit the very idea of fighting corruption.
If the selection of judges is not independent and unbiased, it will result in the same old obedient advocates of “rule of telephone,” with the only difference being the sign on the door that would say “anti-corruption judge.”
The Ukrainian authorities has to stop imitating anti-corruption reforms and take the last step necessary for the real fight against corruption in the country. The launch of the High Anti-Corruption Court can become a final nail in the coffin of corruption, and Ukraine cannot pass up this chance.
