The director of the national anti-corruption office, appointed for seven years, as well as the other members of the office, are chosen through a public, open and transparent competition. A selection commission, composed of three members appointed by the Ukrainian cabinet of ministers, as well as three others proposed by international partner organizations − all of whom must have a “impeccable reputation”of the “high professional and moral qualities”and at least five years of experience in law enforcement or anti-corruption − is responsible for appointing the director.
The office also has a civilian advisory council, which helps strengthen transparency and citizen control over the body.
The accusations of attempts to destabilize the government that you mention, however, were made by the Ukrainian presidency itself in the middle of the summer. In July, the presidency announced its intention to end the independence of two bodies responsible for fighting corruption – the specialized anti-corruption prosecutor’s office (SAP) and the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) -, justifying this decision by the need to rid them of corruption.“Russian influence” within them. A law along these lines was adopted by Parliament on July 22, before being promulgated by Volodymyr Zelensky.
But this law sparked an outcry in civil society and the first large-scale street protests in kyiv since the start of the Russian offensive in 2022. It also provoked strong criticism from the European Union, “deeply concerned” by what she had described as “serious setback”.
The protest was also expressed on social networks. “A widespread opinion is that it is impossible to criticize power during a war, because the hand of the enemy obviously slips in. (…). But everything has a limitwrote the lawyer and deputy of Kharkiv Ihor Tcherniak. Ukraine is not Russia (… ). We are rebels, not slaves. »
Nine days later, on July 31, under pressure from the street and from kyiv’s European partners, the head of state finally decided to restore the autonomy of the two organizations by passing a new law.
The presidency may have backpedaled, but NGOs specializing in the fight against corruption still speak today of a secret campaign aimed at putting the two agencies under pressure and discrediting their work in the eyes of public opinion.
Fa