BY
The National
Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) has released its 6 month report to the
public. Unfortunately for most readers the 68 page report is only
publicly available in Ukrainian – or at least at the time of writing no English
version has been found hidden within the dark and murky corners of the
Internet.
Some
interesting numbers include the fact that currently NABU is thus far
investigating 264 corruption cases that amount to UAH 82.9 billion in
nefariously acquired assets.
Put in
context, that figure exceeds the forecast for the budget deficit of the Ukrainian
nation in 2017.
Currently
NABU has arrested funds in the amounts of UAH 601.94 million, $80.16
million, €7.41 million and £3170, notwithstanding a lot of immovable
and movable property – all of which has yet to find its way back to the State
coffers due to a distinct lack of court verdicts.
Interestingly,
and perhaps surprisingly, it appears only 23% of current investigations involve
the heads of State or municipal owned companies.
Clearly the
bottleneck, or more accurately point of due process constipation, can be
attributed to the courts and judicial system.
The
requirement for a specialised anti-corruption court is made not only by reason
of appointing only the most unsullied of unsullied judges to such a court for
reasons of integrity, but also to avoid/reduce (the probably deliberate) due
process backlog.
However the
functioning of the courts are not the remit of NABU – other the than busting
corrupt judiciary which certainly is within its remit.
Looking at
the current state of play, the most obvious tool still deliberately being
withheld from NABU is the ability to conduct its own SIGINT by way of
wiretapping, (so perhaps COMINT would be more precise). NABU is still
reliant upon the SBU, which clearly has implications regarding the integrity
and confidentiality of NABU operations.
Will the
Verkhovna Rada find the political will to pass the pending legislation that
will allow NABU (with due cause) the ability to wiretap those very
parliamentarians and others within the political, and institutional elite?
It seems very
unlikely, and thus corruption among the elites, which is a rather diplomatic
way of putting a veneer upon what is in effect organised crime more often than
not, is unlikely to be tackled anywhere near as effectively as it could and
should be. Organised crime is often (rightly) cited as a threat to
national security by many nations – ne’er more so can it be so when a nation is
at war, which Ukraine is.
Nevertheless
the NABU report has to be welcomed – not only for reasons of transparency but
also because it clearly identifies (what everybody already knows) the points of
constipation within the process that prevent justice being seen to be done –
and the continuing lack of political and institutional will to correct matters.
No comments:
Post a Comment