The blocking by the parliament of opening the declarations of officials for another year is an eloquent testimony of how we really want to be in the EU. But the report of an external independent assessment on the effectiveness of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) is a precedent. 217 pages of a detailed report of events and their consequences by the head and team of the key link of the entire anti-corruption unit. Under the magnifying glass of the international commission – 2020-2021 years of activity of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). The main message of the new history of reforms for Ukraine: read, think, draw conclusions! If, of course, you have brains, political will and public power. All cards are revealed.
It should be noted that the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption (NACP) fulfilled 72 percent of the criteria developed and approved by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine for nine evaluation objects. However, 28 percent of the "minus" are harsh white threads with which the current head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) sewed all the activities of the agency, ultimately preventing the international commission from recognizing the institution as effective (read the Summary of the main conclusions of the report), and Oleksandr Novikov himself as an example for leaders of state authorities to follow.
It is about "the insufficient level of transparency of the agency's work; serious errors in the approach to the development of normative and legal acts regulating the activities of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) employees in key areas; shortcomings in the organizational structure and personnel decisions, as well as in the implementation of the internal control function."
At the same time, the commission did not dare to directly call the work of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) headed by Novikov ineffective. However, the question is why? – can be used as an argument in favor of the current chapter only by those who have not read the report. Such a double assessment is rather a tribute to the stability of the institution, which, as we have already noted, is the basis of the entire anti-corruption bloc, which needs to be strengthened and which will go to the competition for the selection of a new leader by October.
We will try, based on the report, public facts that we recorded during Novikov's term of office, as well as on information from sources (in particular, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), to place the main emphasis on the state of the agency. The time of optimistic restraint regarding the anti-corruption bloc has passed. However, a meeting with a sobering reality is always an opportunity to climb to the next level of reform.
The National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP)as an institution. Implemented, but opaque, with manual "instructions" instead of adjusted orders
Today, no one questions the fact that the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) was realized as an institution, and that it was Oleksandr Novikov in its new format of existence, that is, at the first stage of managing the agency, that he managed to cope with the main task: to eliminate widespread corruption in the body and assemble a professional team. (In 2019, the amendments to the law on the prevention of corruption reformatted the management model of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) from a collegial to a single-principal one). Most of the fact that the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) during Novikov's term of office was brilliantly covered on its website, in numerous interviews of the chairman, etc., until a certain moment inspired only respect and unconditional trust.
However, as it turned out, several scandalous cases related to the position of the head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), which leaked out in the last year, confirmed the large-scale history of the hidden transformation of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) from an anti-corruption body to an "autocratic" organization loyal to the authorities. At least this is how Novikov saw and did the representatives of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). Unfortunately, the elimination of the "feudal fragmentation" of the once collegial the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) (when the members of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) led by Ms. Korchak closely supervised the heads of departments who were forbidden to communicate with each other) did not guarantee the protection of the institution from the "tsar", who was deafened by the sound of brass trumpets. This fact the auditors recorded absolutely impartially.
Manuscripts are burning
The first and key signal about the quality of the anti-corruption body, which by definition should have been a model of transparency! – given at the very beginning of the report, where the commission, describing the sources of obtaining and gathering information for its research, mentioned two packages of documents that it never managed to get from the agency: " the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) did not provide data regarding the integrity check of its employees, because, according to according to the information of the agency, they were destroyed during the introduction of martial law in Ukraine by the decree of the President of Ukraine dated February 24, 2022 No. 64/2022".
Seriously?! Do not doubt it. Although, of course, we did not find any such instructions in the presidential decree. But there could not be any, since, according to such logic, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) would have to "destroy" its entire documentary base. But in the end, "manuscripts" related to the integrity of Novikov and his entourage were "burned."
And if in your head, as well as in mine, black thoughts immediately flashed, then here you are: the ninth block of the report (criteria 9.30–9.32) describes in detail the shocking facts regarding the monitoring of the lifestyle of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) employees, as well as a full inspection of their declarations by the Internal Control Department of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP).
"Current procedures did not make it possible to effectively check the declarations of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) employees and monitor their lifestyle," the auditors conclude. – Many provisions of the Procedure for conducting a full verification of the declaration of a person authorized to perform the functions of the state or local self-government cannot be applied to verify the declarations of employees of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). For example, in order to check the declaration of the head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), it is necessary to take additional precautionary measures." And not to use the general procedure by the decision of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). However, a separate procedure has not been developed in the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP).
Question: why were they burned? Hiding the results of inaction?
Omnipotent internal control
While the Agency's Internal Control Department was clearly not coping with its main task, defined by law, the head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) made an extraordinary (and, frankly, illegal) decision – he gave this unit additional responsible functions.
"The function of verifying the declarations of employees of intelligence agencies and persons who hold positions classified as state secrets was assigned by the head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) to the Department of Internal Control of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), which does not correspond to the powers of this unit defined by the Law "On Prevention of Corruption", - state the auditors (criterion 9.26). "What's more: the head of the Internal Control Department was a former the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) official, which indicated a possible conflict of interests."
Literally a few weeks after the publication of the auditors' report, the head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) Novikov dismissed the permanent head of the Department of Internal Control of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) Roman Norets. But the dismissal did not occur as a result of Novikov's attempt to resolve the conflict of interests of his childhood friend, but after a shocking case, which was publicized on social networks by the daughter of the head of the Internal Control Department of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). It is hardly worth revealing the details of the domestic violence and murder committed by Norets, as the girl claims, her pet. It is better, on the recommendation of the auditors, to focus on one more revealing fact for our analysis.
We are talking about the second package of documents – the procedure for implementing financial control measures regarding employees of the special services, which the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) did not provide to the commission after several official requests. Arguing that "the disclosure of such information would violate the legislation on information protection, would interfere with the proper performance of official duties by the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) employees and would pose a threat to national security." No more and no less.
"Therefore, the representatives of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) failed to implement a transparent and accountable approach to the verification of property declarations of employees of intelligence agencies and persons holding positions classified as state secrets. The corresponding normative legal acts were not made public and did not undergo public discussion during development," the auditors summarize.
What are the risks of non-transparency and, as a result, ineffectiveness of checks of declarations and lifestyles of secret service employees? A complete lack of state control over the quality of personnel appointed by the authorities to the special services, which massively surrendered our territories to the enemy after February 24. In particular, by simply becoming traitors.
And here we come to rest on another illegal scheme of the internal organization of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), "patented" by its current head.
Legally null and void methods instead of statutory legal acts registered with the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine
During his term of office, Novikov illegally transferred the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine to self-contained manual management. "One of the most problematic practices was the replacement by the head of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine of the adoption of mandatory bylaws with so-called methodical recommendations or other non-mandatory documents," the auditors state (criteria 9.8, 9.11).
Methodological recommendations, in contrast to normative legal acts provided for by law, were not registered in the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine. "This practice violated the provisions of the law on the prevention of corruption, the principle of constitutional legality and other principles of the rule of law, in particular legal certainty and predictability - let's not forget that the auditors are writing all this about the key institution of the anti-corruption bloc! "The application of such a procedure also allowed the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) to avoid holding public consultations with the public regarding draft documents and not to publish the adopted acts."
The commission was seriously concerned by the fact that such practice had a systemic nature and related to various spheres of activity, in particular, such key spheres as financial control over public officials and control over the prevention of conflicts of interest. At the same time, we remember that methodological recommendations signed by Novikov are not a document at all, and they are not obligatory for anyone to follow. In contrast to the procedure prescribed in the law, checked and registered by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, which can be an argument in court in case of a dispute over the actions or inaction of the same representatives of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP).
The audit commission clearly considers all of the above-mentioned actions of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) as illegal (criteria 4.9, 5.9 and 5.10) and strongly demands that the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) change the system. In this series, there is another recent case, which, given the time of its appearance, did not become the subject of audit consideration, but Novikov just as "methodically" created it outside the legal field. It is about the so-called List of international sponsors of the war, which is compiled by the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) within the framework of its abstract project "War and Sanctions". It, of course, requires separate consideration. However, it is already necessary to separate the public demand for justice during the war from the illegal activities of the head of a specific state body.
If Novikov was included in the interdepartmental group from the beginning in relation to sanctions, therefore the active activity of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) in this non-core area can be somehow justified, then the List of International War Sponsors is another "methodical" misunderstanding from the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). Which, however, has become a powerful tool for influencing the international markets of individual countries. As a result of the reputational losses caused by the actions of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), the market value of certain companies falls, accordingly, the competitors of these companies gain market advantages. At the same time, no one knows which of his methods Oleksandr Novikov puts this or that company on the "black list". Which in itself constitutes a significant corruption risk.
In addition, the list, usually indicated on the website, is an important tool of foreign policy. Only the agreed foreign policy of the belligerent state, not the head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) Novikov or any other head of the state body. Even if someone in the government or on the Bankova Street was behind him. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, listed on the website as a partner of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) in the sanctions project, consistently writes official letters to the head of the agency regarding the inadmissibility of Novikov's excess of powers and the damage such actions of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) cause to the interests of Ukraine.
According to the information of our sources in the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), this aspect of relations between Ukraine and the EU was raised by the head of EU diplomacy, Josep Borrell, in a working conversation with the Minister of Foreign Affairs. David O'Sullivan, the EU's special representative on sanctions, strongly recommended to stop this practice, who in mid-June specially came to Kyiv to meet with the leadership of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP).
This visit was caused by a real crisis, when the 11th package of EU anti-Russian sanctions and a new tranche of military aid worth half a billion euros were blocked as a result of the actions of the National Security Agency of Ukraine. Greece was forced to set up a blockade in June 2023, after back in July 2022 (!) the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) unjustifiably included five Greek companies in the list of war sponsors, accusing them of violating the sanctions regime, which they did not actually violate. After that, during the year, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) simply ignored the informal signals of the Greek government, transmitted through the line of the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
As a result, under the pressure of the European Commission, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) temporarily suspended the status of "international war sponsors" for Greek companies, allegedly to conduct work consultations. This made it possible to unlock the 11th sanctions package and military aid. But due to an unexplained coincidence of circumstances, when in early August President Zelenskyy announced that Greece had become the 14th country to support security guarantees for Ukraine, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) renewed all five Greek companies on the list of international sponsors of the war. A source in the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) confirmed that the decision to enter the list is made by Novikov personally.
Opaque competitions and "own" people
We well remember how Covid-19 became a convenient excuse not to carry out a full-fledged reform of the civil service: competitions for the positions of civil servants were canceled. The war only consolidated the conquest of power, which allowed itself to staff ministries and departments with "their" people in a manual mode with corruption and any other risks. The number of scandals that we are currently observing, in particular in the defense sector, is a confirmation of this.
So, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), which not only monitors the purity of the declarations of state officials, but also patronizes units for the prevention of corruption in other bodies of state power, and which, by definition, should be a personnel example, to put it mildly, is not such (criteria 9.12– 9.14).
The regulation on open competitive selection for the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), adopted in March 2020, caused the auditors to comment on "the procedure for holding special competitions, forming the composition of the commission, conducting an integrity interview."
First of all, neither the test results nor the list of candidates admitted to the next stage of the competition were made public on the website of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). Instead of approving one winner of the competition, the commission offered the chairman of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) three candidates to choose from. At the same time, the number of members and composition of the tender commission remained uncertain, which indicates excessive discretion.
"On the one hand, this created risks of changing the personnel or the number of commissions for each specific competition, and in this way the influence of the representatives of the Public Council at the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) in the competition commission could be weakened in some cases," the auditors note. "On the other hand, this practice potentially made it possible to create special competition commissions for specific competitions."
Secondly, the provision stipulates that the meeting of the tender commission is authorized if "more than half of the total composition of the commission" took part in it. And "the decision of the competition commission is considered adopted if the majority of those present at the meeting voted for it." This means that less than half of the approved composition of the tender commission can potentially make a decision on any issue. And this is nonsense!
Thirdly, open tenders for the positions of heads of individual structural units of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) were mostly not held. The National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) abused transfer procedures instead of holding open tenders. Moreover, "the commission received a confidential message about examples that testify to the insufficient impartiality of the members of the competition commission during the conduct of certain open competitions."
At the same time, in a February interview with ZN.UA, the head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), not at all embarrassed, stated that "the civil service reform is practically not working now. And the only institution in the country where competitions are still ongoing is the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP)."
Novikov's entire management system is sewn with white threads. In conclusion, we note that "Management and organizational capacity of the National Agency" is the only object of the auditors' evaluation, which scored only 48% of "pluses", essentially receiving an "unsatisfactory" rating (see the 9th object of the criteria).
The National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) as a function. Assertive, but with an unresolved conflict of interests in relations with the Bankova Street and the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. Built according to Novikov's patterns from the inside, the National Committee performed its immediate external functions. It is primarily about checking the declarations and lifestyle of officials at all levels, as well as comprehensive organization of the corruption prevention system in state authorities. It must be admitted that there were quite a few giant boulders on the way to the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, which Novikov either valiantly moved – and that was the case – or prudently bypassed.
"The most notable attempt to limit the powers of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) was the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine from October 2020 to cancel several important powers of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), in particular financial control over the assets and interests of civil servants," the auditors quite expectedly noted in the report. – The decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine seriously undermined the legal framework in the field of combating corruption. This led to the closure of numerous criminal and administrative proceedings regarding alleged corruption or corruption-related offenses, including in the area of responsibility of the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption."
Less than two months after the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, thanks to a tough position and public pressure, the parliament returned criminal liability for unreliable declaration. But not in full: illegal concealment of assets is currently punishable by only one year of imprisonment. In this rather wild for a civilized state, not much really depended on Novikov the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) team.
As, however, in a series of subsequent force majeure circumstances, to which the parliament reacted specifically: first, during the pandemic in 2020, by pausing the financial reporting of political parties (was it really necessary?), and then in 2022, during the martial law, canceling the declaration and verification of declarations. In particular, when entering the civil service. By the way, the deputies unexpectedly quickly unblocked the party case literally on August 23 (according to our sources in the parliament, one of the vice speakers of the parliament, one of the vice prime ministers and one of the now former deputy heads of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) contributed to the adoption of draft law No. 9419-1). But draft law No. 9534 (on the return to declarations and full checks) was first technologically filled with amendment spam, and today it was voted in the hall with a killer amendment: the register of declarations was left closed for another year, with the possibility for declarants to voluntarily submit an application to the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) for personal opening of the declaration within this year. This cynical slowness of the authorities speaks eloquently of how we really want the EU.
Anti-corruption strategy is both a merit and a problem of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP)
The position and efforts of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) on the development and later adoption of the state anti-corruption strategy and government program is a European case. And this has every chance of laying the right foundations for the prevention of corruption in state authorities. The auditors agreed that the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) team developed a high-quality document (it's about a strategy).
"The anti-corruption strategy was worked on by the ex-deputy head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), Ivan Presniakov, and the head of the specialized department, Dmytro Kalmykov. Andrii Vyshnevskyi replaced Presniakov in the work on the government program. They did it in the most inclusive way possible, - says our source in the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). – International experts and public organizations were involved. It was a very long but important process. The only problem is that the strategy was not 100 percent relevant, as it was not approved by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine for a long time. An attempt was made to correct this in the program, on which 15 working groups worked together with the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), but its approval was also demonstrably delayed. Parliament was delayed by a year, and then the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine was delayed by another two months."
In the end, the program for the state strategy for 2021-2025 was adopted only in March 2023. And that's not surprising, is it? After all, the real attitude of any government to the fight against corruption should be sought not in high-profile projects based on PR and populism, such as, for example, the recent initiative of the president to equate corruption with treason, but in specific routine actions of the government (while simultaneously changing the systemic basis of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU). Which, as usual, drags out for years what should be adopted as quickly as possible. This is another clear message of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) auditors to Ukrainian society: look and search deeper. It is always easier to spot the risks and prevent the appearance of corruption in time than to later prove a crime that has already been committed and punish it.
"The meaning of the anti-corruption strategy is not to solve all problems and eliminate corruption during its implementation period," the source continues. The meaning lies in the correct definition of goals and the technological breakdown of these goals into actions in the adopted government program – with the definition of terms, executors, budget, etc. Today, the state has a technological map in its hands, which shows everyone responsible for the details and the overall picture. On August 18, the open part of the anti-corruption strategy implementation monitoring system was presented. You can go to the website and see the dynamics of the implementation of the assigned tasks for each ministry."
Therefore, anti-corruption activists should start their working day from this site to regularly ask the right questions to officials. At the same time, not forgetting about the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). After all, the agency, too engrossed in the development of the state strategy and completely forgot about its own in 2020. Which in the context of all the above is very bad.
Moreover, according to the auditors, " the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) should shift the emphasis from the periodic planning of anti-corruption measures to the creation of an effective system of internal anti-corruption control in each state body." And with internal control, as we have already managed to find out, there are big unsolved problems within the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) itself. It is precisely about the fact that, demanding perfect cleanliness from others, wash the floor at home.
Declarations, "quick" checks and idle lifestyle monitoring
Here, caught by the noose, the auditors again pulled out a long management thread with methodical recommendations. " The National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) introduced a new procedure of so-called quick checks of declarations instead of proper control of the correctness and completeness of their filling," the commission states. – This went beyond legal authority of this institution and caused duplication. The National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) classified several other internal acts as recommendations, trying to avoid public control and mandatory registration with the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine.
The same happened with the provision of lifestyle monitoring, a procedure with a high level of intrusion into the privacy of the individuals it affects. "Instead of adopting a regulation, as it should be done, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) issued recommendations to its staff," the auditors note. "This practice created legal risks for the implementation of the NACP's powers of financial control, which undermines trust in the National Agency." This is in the key function of the agency!
The National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) should carefully study the reservations of interested parties and inclusively define and apply the procedure for selecting declarations for mandatory full verification (criterion 5.6). "Sequence of such review should be determined based on risk assessment, not vague recommendations."
On the minefield of conflict of interests: Yermak, Tatarov and Co
"The commission recorded a questionable managerial decision of the head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP): not to use random automated allocation of cases to verify cases of conflicts of interest and other related violations." (By the way, there is also a problem with the automatic distribution of verification of declarations, the commission pointed out that the procedure is written in such a way that manual intervention is possible). That is, to put it simply, Novikov gave himself the sole right to decide which of the THE NATIONAL AGENCY ON CORRUPTION PREVENTION (NACP) employees will consider cases related to a conflict of interest with another technique. At the same time, the entire system of government in our country is built on a conflict of interests, and preventing corruption means correctly and timely indicating where there is such a risk. Quite boldly.
And it is already painfully familiar to us: "During the evaluation period, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) canceled the procedure for drawing up administrative protocols for offenses related to conflicts of interest and other anti-corruption restrictions (for example, gifts and incompatibility). However, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) has issued three separate "methodological recommendations", which define how authorized employees of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) should detect relevant offenses, collect evidence and prepare administrative protocols on violations. Regulation of this procedure with the help of "recommendations" deprives the relevant officials of legal certainty and may lead to abuse of powers by the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP).
An explanation of Novikov's management strategy, which causes auditors even more concern, may be that "such an approach is used to prevent potential liability for the NACP's improper performance of its functions." "The Commission cannot agree with such a practice, as it limits the accountability of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) and undermines the basic principles of the activities of public authorities," the audit puts a bold dot in the "diagnosis".
The commission found numerous cases when the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) failed to fulfill its duties regarding monitoring and prevention of conflicts of interest. This list includes the cases of Tatarov, Ivanisov, Vitrenko, Leros, Yermak and others (criterion 4.15). We will give two examples analyzed by auditors, which are the most discussed in society.
Case of Tatarov. "In March 2021, the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine appealed to the Deputy Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Oleh Tatarov regarding a possible violation of requirements related to a conflict of interests. In 2020-2021, he was a suspect in criminal proceedings. At the same time, attempts to intervene in criminal proceedings against Tatarov began, which was repeatedly reported by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine of Ukraine (NABU). The State Bureau of Investigation also played a role in this obstruction: it conducted a pre-trial investigation in the criminal proceedings, within the framework of which it seized the materials of the court case, which was of decisive importance for the transfer of the criminal proceedings against O. Tatarov from the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine of Ukraine (NABU) to the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU)," the auditors describe the situation.
At the same time, the commission clarifies that Tatarov continued to coordinate the activities of law enforcement agencies, and his conflict of interests was resolved only with regard to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine of Ukraine (NABU), the General Prosecutor's Office, and the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU). As for other bodies, in particular by the representatives of the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI), no such decisions were made. "The representatives of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine sent an appeal under these circumstances in March 2021," the audit clarifies. – In response to this, on March 17, 2021, THE NATIONAL AGENCY ON CORRUPTION PREVENTION (NACP) announced (letter 33-02/14969/21) that it will monitor and control compliance with the relevant requirements of the law. In the future, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) did not inform about the adopted decisions or measures taken. Only in response to an additional request, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) reported (letter 92-02/69888-21 dated 17.09.2021) that it had addressed inquiries to the Office of the President of Ukraine and the Joint State Political Directorate (JSPD) and had received the necessary information and copies of documents from them.
In the letter of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), it is also stated that in the OPU "measures have been taken to eliminate any possibility of interaction with the Prosecutor General's Office, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine of Ukraine (NABU) and the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU)", and the corresponding powers have been entrusted to the Deputy Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Smirnov in December 2021. "However, it follows from the response that the lack of review of Tatarov's powers in relation to other investigative bodies, in particular the representatives of the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI), was not investigated at all," the report says. – In addition, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) did not give any assessment to the key accusations set forth in the appeal. In addition, the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption" does not provide for such a measure to resolve a conflict of interest as "eliminating any possibility of interaction" with someone. Therefore, there is a question about the legality and reasonableness of the decisions of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) during the inspection in principle."
In this regard, the auditors drew attention to Novikov's revealing answer to a question in an interview with a journalist from the publication "Slovo i Dilo" regarding the general monitoring of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) conflict of interest in the case of Tatarov.
"Slovo i Dilo ": "Mykhailo Tkach's investigation into Oleg Tatarov's birthday celebration was recently made public. Deputy Prosecutor General Oleksiy Symonenko came to him, who, in fact, took Tatarov's case from the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) and handed it over to the Security Service of Ukraine in December 2020. Do you check these facts?".
Oleksandr Novikov: "We have not received any appeals on this matter. I would like to emphasize that a conflict of interest will exist if friendly or any other relations arose before the decision to transfer Tatarov's case to the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU). You yourself said that Symonenko made a decision almost a year ago. That is, the fact that he was present at Tatarov's birthday a year later cannot by itself indicate a conflict of interest, even for chronological reasons. We cannot start monitoring on our own because there is no reason."
Yermak's case. "The Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine notes that at the beginning of 2020, in the journalistic investigation of the program "Schemes" (Radio Liberty), it was reported about a possible violation of restrictions on receiving gifts by the head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Andriy Yermak, who used a private plane for a flight from Minsk to Kyiv for free - the commission describes the situation. – The Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine appealed to the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) regarding a possible violation of the requirements of the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption". In response to this appeal, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) reported (letter 31-02/13555/20 dated 04.14.2020) that "the collection of factual data is underway, on the basis of which the presence or absence of an administrative offense related to corruption will be established."
However, according to the information of the auditors, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) did not send further information about the results of such an inspection. Meanwhile, the terms of imposing an administrative fine have expired. In the commission's opinion, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) checked the specified circumstances for an unreasonably long time. The Anti-Corruption Center did not say what actions were taken as part of the inspection. "Accordingly, the commission cannot assess whether the authorized persons of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) took appropriate actions to establish all the circumstances necessary for making a decision."
Undoubtedly, Oleksandr Novikov himself can answer all these questions, who manually appointed the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) employees, who investigated Yermak's case "for an unreasonably long time", turned a blind eye to Tatarov's actions... and anyone who represents the government today. And to whom the head of the key anti-corruption body Oleksandr Novikov shows obvious loyalty. What, in fact, was recorded by the external audit. That is why we can always have suspicions.
And not only in us. No matter how much Novikov shakes the hands of the mayors on camera, signing memorandums of cooperation, they clearly know that the protocol of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) on the mayors of Chernihiv and Rivne is Novikov's submission to the interested in the Bankova Street. Thus, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) drew up the correct protocol, and the court, working out the scheme, applied an unreasonably harsh decision, and removed the mayors from their posts. But, as they say, now the nuances are clear.
The representatives of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) as a guarantee designed to keep the legislative framework, but pauses under the pressure of interested parties
All the activities of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) are primarily aimed at changing the behavior of officials. Competitions for civil service, declaration of assets, monitoring of conflicts of interest, as well as the activation of the function of prevention of corruption within ministries, agencies and other institutions are designed to systematically limit the appetites of those who have decided to improve their financial situation through bribes and kickbacks. To what extent the institution under the leadership of Novikov was able to do this, the audit determined, and we tried to indicate in our story in all the interrelationships.
However, there is another level of authority of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), which was not fully studied by the auditors (the audit methodology was drawn up and approved by the Cabinet of Ministers) and which turned out to be scattered over all nine objects of their assessment. We are talking about anti-corruption examination of draft legislative acts adopted by the parliament. After all, you can check declarations as much as you want, write strategies and programs, but if people's deputies adopted a low-quality legislative act, then all officials who properly declare will comply with the rules of the notoriously corrupt law. And this is, perhaps, the most important lever of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), with the help of which the anti-corruption institution can influence the behavior of the state system in general, put whole industries in a healthy framework.
The algorithm of actions of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) is regulated by Article 55 of the profile law, the internal Regulations of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC), as well as its own methodology. For this, the agency created a special department, and also established relations with the government. "The National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) managed to achieve amendments to the Regulations of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine and to force the Cabinet of Ministers to send draft normative acts to the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) for anti-corruption examination," the auditors clarify.
However, something else is important: the lack of a clear mechanism of action after receiving the conclusions of the anti-corruption examination of the draft laws from the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). That is, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) cannot force ministers and deputies to write laws without corruption loopholes laid there, and the parliament cannot accept them. The authorities may or may not pay attention to the comments of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). However, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) has a powerful tool in its hands — publicity. Why, in fact, does the agency have its own media site and the Public Council (and, by the way, where is it?). But even here Oleksandr Novikov somehow did not succeed.
Scandalous draft law No. 5655 as a marker for Novikov
The draft law on urban planning reform is, in fact, the first signal that allowed the public and the media to doubt the correctness of what is happening inside the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). We have written enough about this history of lobbying without rules on the part of the authorities, but we will literally mark the chronology of the role of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) in it with a dotted line. This is an archival case, because the basis of corruption is laid under the entire industry, which will play a key role in post-war reconstruction.
The National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) published its conclusions regarding corruption mines No. 5655 in October 2021, literally three months after the registration of the draft law. "Overcoming corruption in this area requires the development and adoption of a comprehensive legal framework for the development of urban planning, as well as the implementation of an effective system of state control and supervision. Taking into account the above, a necessary step to minimize corruption risks in the field of urban planning is the adoption of the Urban Planning Code. The draft law contains corruption-inducing factors and needs to be revised taking into account the specified recommendations," concluded the experts of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). And they gave their recommendations on how to fix everything.
For more than a year, the construction lobby, led by the key author of 5655, head of the Servant of the People party, Olena Shuliak, "implemented the recommendations of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP)", spammed the draft law with corrections, actively pushing it into the hall. All this is against the background of the obvious non-acceptance of the draft law by the main stakeholders - local self-government bodies, the community of architects and experts. In conditions of complete opacity, lobbyists from the government changed the draft law by 90 percent, and the special committee headed by Shuliak simultaneously on the eve of the vote approved the second reading and set the date for the vote in the parliament hall. All this was actively covered by the media, and the process was closely watched by the head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) Novikov.
Who, by the way, has in his hands a recent study of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) on priority industries for strategic analysis of corruption risks. Where, according to the results of the analysis of spheres/industries based on the criterion of the probability of corruption risks, three spheres of public administration and economy were determined, in which corruption offenses most often become the subject of prosecution or investigative journalism. In the top three, in addition to energy and energy saving, law 5655 includes state regulation of business conduct and land relations.
Next is a detective.
Oleksandr Novikov, who, according to the Procedure of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), is personally responsible for the anti-core expertise, prudently transfers the entire official part of the communication regarding 5655 to his new, recently appointed deputy Andriy Vishnevsky (who does not suspect anything?).
On November 30, 2022, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) sent a letter signed by Vishnevsky to the committee with a concise conclusion: the new version of project 5655 does not correspond to the anti-corruption strategy. Finish it! And eight pages of recommendations.
As ZN.UA wrote earlier, according to Art. 55 of the Law of Ukraine "On the Prevention of Corruption", the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) may, on its own initiative, take the rewritten draft law for an anti-corruption examination, which is a reason to suspend the procedure of its consideration or adoption for a period of up to ten days. At the same time, it is important to note: experts claim that, according to Clause 5 of the aforementioned order, these ten days may be enough only for monitoring the legislative act, especially if it is rewritten by 90 percent. And if corruption norms are discovered, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAPC) is obliged to take the draft law for an anti-corruption examination. It doesn't matter if it is repeated or not, the important thing is that corruption norms have been revealed. However, there is no clear wording regarding re-examination in the law (and we remember that anti-examination of the first reading of 5655 was conducted). So, if the head of the agency has some other goals, besides the systematic elimination of corruption risks, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), of course, may not conduct a second examination. One way or another, this must be clarified by the legislator. But the profile committee headed by Shuliak, even based on the results of the monitoring of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), received 10 points of comments and recommendations.
At the same time, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) does not make any public communication regarding its official position. And since the parliamentary process remains completely closed, and people's deputies are already talking about the appointed date of the vote in the hall, the National Union of Architects of Ukraine (NSAU) appeals to the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) with a request to clarify its position.
On December 8, 2022, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), under Vishnevsky's signature, gave an answer to the Union of Architects, clarifying that, according to the profile committee, whose meeting was held on the same day, NACP's comments were taken into account, but the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) still has not received the final version of the document.
On December 9, 2022 (four days before the vote), "Deputy Prime Minister for the Reconstruction of Ukraine Oleksandr Kubrakov, holding a working meeting with representatives of the embassies of the G7 countries and the Eurodelegation, emphasized the consideration of all the comments of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) and the importance of the fact that "the key anti-corruption body supports this reform".
On December 13, 2022, the parliament voted with the support of the Opposition Platform – For Life (OPZZh) votes and received 5,655 votes. On the same day, a petition to the president with the demand to promise the law receives 25 thousand votes.
On December 14, 2022, Oleksandr Novikov in an interview with NV, a Ukrainian weekly public-political journal and information-news internet resource, directly states: all the conclusions of the anti-corruption examination and the recommendations of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) have been fully taken into account. From the point of view of anti-corruption mechanisms, the agency does not see articles that would create corruption risks. the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) has no questions to the law to the extent that was analyzed by the anti-core expertise.
And then there is the solution.
On December 26, 2022, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), under the signature of Andrii Vyshnevskyi, responded to a repeated request from the National Union of Architects of Ukraine, clarifying that it received the final version of the draft law only on December 9, that is, four days before the vote. Vyshnevskyi, mentioning the neutrality of the position of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), (which is normal for an anti-corruption body), clarifies that representatives of the agency did not participate in the meeting of the committee on December 8, nor were they present on the day of the vote. And the final text submitted to the president for signature has not yet been published.
"Therefore, despite the spread of information about taking into account the comments and recommendations of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) (with references to previous information from the committee members), - writes Vishnevsky, - the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) currently has no opportunity to make final conclusions about the extent to which its comments and recommendations have been taken into account."
That is, Novikov had such an opportunity on December 14, but his deputy did not on the 26th.
At the same time, Vyshnevskyi, drawing attention to the unfulfilled fifth point of comments and recommendations, confirmed that in the last version of the draft law, which was submitted to the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), most of the comments were still taken into account. The letter does not specify what the majority is, but we can clarify. At that time, "the analysis of the final edition, which has already become public, indicated that "only two remarks of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) (4 and 6) can be considered fully taken into account. In addition, five comments (2, 3, 7, 8 and 9) were partially taken into account, and three more comments were not taken into account at all." These are comments 1, 5, 10.
And now — another official quote from Novikov's deputy, Andrii Vyshnevskyi, who was fired a few months later because of another case, where he also dared to voice a position that differed from the position of the head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). "The national agency has always emphasized - both in its public position at the committee meeting on November 28, 2022, and in informal communication with the diplomats of the "Big Seven" countries (Olexandr Kubrakov, read carefully! - Author) that it considers the main corruption risk of this law to be development in an insufficiently open and inclusive manner, in violation of the principle of transparency and consideration of public opinion, established by the Law of Ukraine "On the Basics of State Regulatory Policy in the Field of Economic Activity." End!
However, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), of course, did not make any public statements about this. Although Novikov, if he wished, could not only take the law for re-examination, but even ask the president to promise a law, the mechanisms of which regulate one of the three most corrupt spheres in the country. Moreover, in the history of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) there have been such audacious cases, which, by the way, were recorded by auditors (evaluation criterion 8.2). Why didn't this happen? Perhaps Andrii Vyshnevskyi will want to talk about this in order to strengthen the foundations of the institution that is key for the anti-corruption bloc? As well as about what to do within the single leadership of such a specific institution, when only the head knows how to "correctly" prevent corruption. Otherwise, get out! After all, the deputies are at the discretion of the chairman of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). Simply put, its continuation.
Oleksandr Novikov is currently actively attending the events of the Ministry of Infrastructure, where the author of 5655 Olena Shuliak, with the hope that she will be believed, talks about the "transparent foundations on which the future recovery of Ukraine will be built." In particular, about the "philosophy of the law, literally stitched together by the hard coercion of the corrupt local authorities to bring order to the urban planning documentation." Ms. Olena, read the recommendations of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP): "In the wording of the draft law, the role of town-planning conditions and restrictions is strengthened and town-planning documentation at the local level is leveled." However, the recommendations of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), in particular in this regard, were not implemented. No matter how skillfully you sewed with your white threads.
How should the anti-core expertise work? "The institutional capacity of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) in this aspect is very weak," clarifies our source in the agency. –The presence of only one small department in such a large and complex direction does not solve the problem, although it makes it possible to successfully help ministers and deputies who turn to the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) in the process of preparing draft laws. The national agency needs to have sufficient depth of expertise in all key sectors. And the procedure should be improved – to eliminate legal uncertainty and the possibility of double interpretation of norms, so that situations like those of 5655 do not arise. Only a transparent, inclusive approach, which should contribute to the purpose of this instrument. The resources of the management of anti-core expertise should be several times larger. Then the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) will become one of the leading parts of the corruption prevention system with its checks and balances, which includes the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, the Anti-corruption Committee of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and the expert management of the parliament's apparatus."
Conclusions
Firstly, it is difficult to overestimate the value of the audit conducted by the international commission of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). The shocking information, in fact, put the current head of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) Novikov on the shoulders and, as many think, "may undermine the foundations of the institution." This is at first glance. And from another point of view, more attentive and deeper, it is our real bridge to the European Union. When we can read the truth, speak the truth and build a state of truth.
Secondly, it is quite obvious that autocratic single leadership in such structures contains great risks. As well as collegiality. And this is a topic for the global work of legislators and analysts — whether to appoint the deputy chairman of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) by the hands of the Cabinet of Ukraine, whether to change the method of competitive selection of the chairman himself, or to provide an additional channel for employees within the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) to inform (the question - who?) about the violation of the chairman. By the way, the audit noted that Novikov completely blocked this channel of internal communication of the agency.
Thirdly, the philosophy and mission of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) should change from the priority of punishment to the priority of effective prevention of corruption. The National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) is not about a stick that should be waved demonstratively, it is a system of complex tools that should change the behavior of officials and define healthy boundaries for all public administration systems.