The Prosecutor General has gained full control: how it will change the fight against corruption
22 July 2025 19:48
ANALYSIS FROM 
Following searches of a number of NABU detectives by the SBU, SBI, and the PGO, which were based on traffic accidents involving them and suspicions of possible ties to the aggressor country, the Verkhovna Rada introduced draft law No. 12414 for a second reading and passed it. Once signed by the President, the NABU and the SAPO will lose their independence and become directly subordinate to the Prosecutor General. What this will lead to – found out
After the searches at the NABU, the very next day the Verkhovna Rada passed Bill 12414 in the second reading. According to the NABU, it was amended at the last minute to effectively destroy the independence of the NABU and the SAPO and effectively subordinate their activities to the Prosecutor General. In particular, the draft law provides that:
- The Prosecutor General has access to all NABU cases or may grant such access to any other prosecutor;
- has the right to give binding written instructions to NABU detectives and, in case of non-compliance, to change the jurisdiction by transferring the case to other bodies
- may close the investigation at the request of the defense;
- independently resolves disputes over jurisdiction;
- personally signs suspicions against top officials;
- the head of the SAPO loses the right to be a member of the group of prosecutors – this is decided exclusively by the Prosecutor General.
In fact, if this draft law is adopted, the head of the SAPO becomes a nominal figure, and the NABU loses its independence and becomes a subdivision of the Prosecutor General’s Office. The anti-corruption infrastructure of Ukraine, built up since 2015, will be destroyed,” the NABU said on the eve of the vote.
The Prosecutor General decides everything
NABU is losing its monopoly: The Prosecutor General can transfer their cases to other agencies, which weakens the independence of detectives. The Prosecutor General gets a key role in determining the jurisdiction (i.e., who investigates the case), including criminal proceedings of the NABU and the BES. And in criminal cases involving top officials, the Prosecutor General’s approval is mandatory at various stages of the pre-trial investigation.
According to the new version of Article 284(5) of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, the final decision to close criminal proceedings against certain categories of officials, namely the highest officials, including the current or former President of Ukraine, members of the Government, etc., is now made by the Prosecutor General (or a person acting as such).
If the prosecutor decides to close the proceedings against the suspect, the parties to the proceedings may file a petition with the Prosecutor General. The Prosecutor General checks the validity of the closure and, based on the results of the review of the petition, makes one of two decisions
- close the proceedings against the person;
- deny the petition and thus leave the case open.
Such a monopolization of the process opens up space for political or personal influence, and can create a “narrow neck” when the fate of the case is decided behind the scenes, without proper transparency,” lawyers emphasize in their commentary
In Ukraine, the Prosecutor General is appointed by the Verkhovna Rada upon the proposal of the President. This means that he or she may be informally dependent on the political leadership, which may be involved in the case (presidents, prime ministers, ministers, deputies). A conflict of interest arises: the person who is supposed to control may be interested in “covering up,” says lawyer Valentyn Sereda.
Possibility of “withdrawing” cases through backroom agreements
A petition for review of a decision can be used not as a legal tool, but as a tool of pressure or bargaining. There is a risk that proceedings may be closed “in exchange for loyalty”, political or business deals.
The new rule does not provide a clear mechanism for appealing the Prosecutor General’s decision. If he refuses to satisfy the petition or closes the case, it is virtually impossible to appeal, except through the courts, which is a long and not always effective way. The law does not guarantee that every petition will necessarily lead to an objective review. There is a risk of formal replies or inaction,” the lawyer emphasizes.
“In fact, the prosecutor receives expanded powers of control over investigators, detectives of the NABU and the SAPO. The Prosecutor General becomes a central figure in the management of anti-corruption proceedings.
There should be healthy competition
Lawyers believe that law enforcement agencies should be independent of each other and even compete with each other, especially in investigating cases against high-ranking officials. And these “attacks” on the NABU and the SAPO, which are actually the only independent structures, will not lead to anything good, says lawyer Oleg Leontiev.
“It’s very simple: to destroy NABU and SAPO, it is enough to put a chief over them who will be ready to follow any instructions of those who appointed him. This will be very bad. During my years of work in the prosecutor’s office, I myself have repeatedly seen how prosecutors, when ordinary prosecutors were digging up high-profile corruption cases, sold them. The NABU had a procedural prosecutor from the SAPO, and no one else had access to the cases, and now the Prosecutor General and his entourage will get in. And the staff in the prosecutor’s office is not easy today: before the hostilities there were 350 people, and now the staff in the Prosecutor General’s Office is swollen to 2000, and everyone needs to eat. It’s going to be very bad,” Leontyev said.
“The main thing is strict control by the Prosecutor General’s Office over who can and cannot be touched. And all the cases previously investigated by NABU and SAPO will be revised and “buried”, in other words, “sold”.
Failed fight against corruption
From the very beginning of the creation of anti-corruption bodies in Ukraine (2014-2016), the Ukrainian Institute of Politics conducted research that showed sad prospects: like similar structures in other countries, the creation of the HACC, SAPO, NABU is unlikely to bring effective results.
In practice, we see that no dramatic results have been achieved in the fight against corruption, despite the PR and long stories about the importance of creating the HACC, SAPO, NABU, etc. During this time, a parallel vertical of structures was actually created: The NABU collected information, the SAPO passed it to the HACC. But this vertical was built from the “same materials” – the same people representing different political, economic or social groups. It became an instrument of pressure on the Ukrainian elites by our Western partners, but did not become an element of cleansing Ukrainian society of corruption,” said Ruslan Bortnik, director of the Institute of Politics, in a commentary to
“As a result, tens of billions of hryvnias spent over the years have been in vain. They have only created political problems for the government, which reacts harshly and quickly in times of war.
We see that this freedom of anti-corruption bodies, their ability to target embassies and elites, is coming to an end. The reform is not being eliminated, but the infrastructure itself is being re-subordinated to the law enforcement agencies from which it was once separated,” Bortnik added.
“Ukrainians will not feel anything after these changes – it will not affect them in any way. However, the Ukrainian government’s relations with the liberal part of Europe and the US Democrats, who used anti-corruption structures to influence Ukrainian elites, may deteriorate, the politician predicts.
As a reminder, on July 21, SBU, DBR, and PGO officers conducted at least 70 searches and searched more than 15 NABU employees. According to the NABU, the investigative actions are carried out without proper court orders. In the vast majority of cases, these actions were triggered by road accidents – two of which occurred in 2021 and one in 2023, and were under investigation. Some are accused of possible ties with representatives of the Russian special services.
In addition, an unscheduled inspection of the protection of state secrets initiated by the SBU has been launched. It concerns NABU employees who have access to state secrets and conduct covert investigative (detective) actions. Based on its results, the SBU can obtain information about current and planned operational activities and investigative actions of the NABU and the SAPO. Disclosure of this information could disrupt investigative measures and ongoing investigations, the NABU said. Also, the planned inspection of the State Special Communications Service, which covers the technical infrastructure of the NABU, continues.
Author – Alla Dunina
Читайте нас у Telegram: головні новини коротко
