“Contemporary history of Ukraine is written in Prosecutor General’s Office,” this phrase best describes the events that have been unfolding in our country for the past decade. The establishment of the oligarchic system, the high-profile crimes, the corruption which permeates the entirety of government institutions – all of that is the result of the “controlled lawlessness.” The process has been implemented under the direction of the highest authority in the state, subordinating the police and courts to it. And that is the perfect subject to high-profile investigations of the renewed law enforcement after the Revolution of Dignity. But there is nothing in that regard so far.
This “prosecutor’s history” has been recently featuring lot of actors, which came in succession. In terms of the system as a whole, the personality of Prosecutor General and the nature of their activities indicate the presence or absence of political will to adhere to the rule of law. Unfortunately, all of them show one thing – the politicians of Maidan are not in a hurry to investigate high-profile cases that have become catalysts for Ukrainian protests; neither do they rush to establish equality of all citizens in the face of the law.
The latest scandal occurred recently, when it became known that the Prosecutor General wrote to Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin a note concerning alleged violations of law and the “undermining the authority” of the Prosecutor General’s Office. The letter was a reaction to calls from the Foreign Ministry on the need to sack four notorious members of the special committee, which elects the prosecutors of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Office. In its appeals to Prosecutor General, the ministry cited the requirements of the EU and US, which became crucial in regard of visa liberalization with the EU.
JULY 2002. LEONID KUCHMA PRESENTS THE NEW PROSECUTOR GENERAL, SVIATOSLAV PISKUN, AFTER HIS PREDECESSOR MYKHAILO POTEBENKO WAS DISMISSED. THE RULES KUCHMA LAID DOWN IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, INCLUDING THE PROSECUTION SERVICE, ARE NOW SO DEEP-ROOTED THAT EVEN TWO REVOLUTIONS COULD NOT REMOVE THEM / Photo by Anatolii MEDZYK
All these facts have prompted public activists to demand the resignation of Viktor Shokin. But will it change the situation in the Office – as we have seen the new appointments fail to reform the nature of its work (or lack thereof)? How can one influence the very essence, not merely the face of this law-enforcement agency?
COMMENTARY
Daryna KALYNIUK, executive director of the Anti-Corruption Action Center:
“We have no prosecutor’s office as this concept is understood in the civilized world. Our Prosecutor General’s Office and its whole system have spent the past 20 years doing protection racket for those engaged in thefts of public funds, illegal privatization, and common crimes. We want to reform it in some ‘gentle’ way in a year, but it is impossible to reform something that does not exist. Therefore, while we are trying to reform this ‘monster,’ we are also launching parallel small and independent institutions that have to restart the system. The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and Anti-Corruption Special Prosecutor’s Office represent this living blood being injected into the system. Even so, it meets most bitter resistance.
“Although the NABU already has its director and detectives appointed, it may not start criminal proceedings, gather evidence, do seizures, and take procedural actions until there is an anti-corruption prosecutor. These actions will depend on the anti-corruption prosecutor’s stance. If they are controlled by Shokin or Poroshenko, and the president wants this very outcome, the Anti-Corruption Bureau will be used as a tool for political reprisals, pressure, and attacks on personal opponents. The president will have in his pocket the prosecutor general, anti-corruption prosecutor, and director of the NABU – it should not be allowed in a democratic country.”
The public pressure is aimed at Shokin, but he is just another tool doing the president’s will.
“Of course, Shokin is a tool, but the president can always say ‘I have an independent prosecutor general.’ However, the launch of an investigation into Klimkin is a point of no return for Shokin. Therefore, we took a straitjacket, brought it to the PGO building’s walls, and stated that ‘the prosecutor general has gone mad and is dangerous in this position.’ Since rational arguments would not work with Shokin, we hung it on the Presidential Administration building’s fence, thus sending the straitjacket to our Guarantor of the Constitution, and asking him to calm this madman through an immediate dismissal.”
Another recent high-profile development was lifting of EU sanctions imposed on former deputy head of the Presidential Administration Andrii Portnov, and Viktor Yanukovych submitting a similar case to the ECtHR. Is this a failure on the part of the PGO?
“This is a result of the PGO’s corrupt inactivity. Both Shokin and his predecessor Vitalii Yarema knew well that if nefarious origin of assets belonging to Portnov and other Yanukovych associates remained unproven, if no criminal proceedings were to be launched concerning corruption and theft of state property, the sanctions would be lifted. The EU warned of this repeatedly, and EU Ambassador Jan Tombinski visited Yarema in person and appealed to Shokin warning that the sanctions could not be kept in force for long because they were challenged in court.”
Unfortunately, the PGO did not respond, and the EU actually tripped itself trying to keep the sanctions in force as long as possible. The decision in the Portnov case can become a precedent, because he will now ask for compensation from the EU. The EU, in turn, will say that Ukraine provided incorrect information about the cases against these people, so it has to pay this fine. After Portnov, all other members of the Yanukovych regime who have not been brought to court will follow. Out of the sanctioned persons’ list, only three to four cases have made it to court. The Kliuiev brothers, Yurii Ivaniushchenko, and other notorious persons can be next after Portnov.
“We want to overcome impunity, punish corrupt officials, and confiscate their money, but criminal inaction of the PGO proves to the EU that Ukraine is not a worthy, real, and reliable partner, since all cases, not only those regarding the new government, but even those dealing with the fallen regime, are being deliberately destroyed. Therefore, our financial assistance, visa liberalization, and even the victory in the war with Russia are all in danger now, because geopolitically, Ukraine can get support only by being a serious and reliable partner that does not screw up others.”
