The parliament voted on a package of European integration-linked bills on November 5. Passing them is the EU’s precondition for granting visa-free travel to Ukrainian citizens.
It was clear already in the morning that the day would not be easy. First deputy head of the Petro Poroshenko Bloc (PPB) faction, the parliament’s largest, Ihor Kononenko declared they disagreed on some bills. The situation was exacerbated by ambivalent stances of Self Reliance and the Radical Party, which also wavered over voting for some bills. Fatherland faction was supportive in principle, but insisted that the tariff bill had to be voted on first.
As a result, several bills were approved in principle on the second reading, including bills No. 3155, dealing with improving the procedure for documenting refugees and persons in need of additional or temporary protection, and No. 3159, concerned with judicial protection of foreigners and stateless persons. However, changes to the Labor Code, which would prohibit discrimination of sexual minorities, have failed to pass.
Major debates focused on the second readings of three anti-corruption bills: No. 3040 “On the National Agency of Ukraine for Detection, Search for and Management of Assets Derived from Corrupt Actions and Other Crimes”; No. 254a “On Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code Concerning Some Issues of Seizing Assets...” and No. 2541a “On Amendments to the Criminal and Civil Codes of Ukraine Concerning Improvement of the Special Confiscation Institute To Address Corruption Risks in Its Application.”
The essence of all factions’ misgivings was summarized by chairman of the board of the Center for Combating Corruption, expert of the Reanimation Package of Reforms’ anti-corruption group Vitalii Shabunin: “The European Commission’s experts explained in plain words how the Agency could work in practice. However, the amendments proposed between the first and second readings negate it all. In case of the latter two bills passing, the provisions of the Criminal and Criminal Procedure Codes, which are already complicated in application, will become even worse.”
According to PPB MP Viktor Pynzenyk, the bill No. 3040, establishing an agency to manage seized assets, is unprecedented. MP is sure that should it pass, seizures will apply not only to suspects, but to third parties as well. “According to this proposal, if there is reason to believe that the property has any connection with the offense (and despite its owner being not guilty and not knowing about it), it can be seized and transferred to external management. Why is it dangerous? Now, for example, if a bank account is frozen, its holder cannot withdraw funds, but the money stays there. The bill, however, will make money vanish in the event of it being frozen, because the Agency will be entitled to use it,” he explained. According to the MP, the legislators managed to strike a number of harmful provisions from this document while negotiating its passage. For example, they prevented the Agency’s transformation into a commercial structure. “Still, some dangerous provisions have remained: the Agency will be the only government body to have bank accounts. Currently, only business entities may have accounts in banks,” he concluded.
