Legal Gaps and Evasion Opportunities for Corruption Top-players: Analyzing New Legislative Loopholes in Ukraine
Amid recent legislative decisions in Ukraine concerning the operations of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAP), a significant legal loophole emerges that could be exploited by top-level corrupt officials to evade accountability. Specifically, between Law №12414, which largely undermines the independence of these anti-corruption agencies, and the new presidential bill №13533, an 'opening' appears for manipulations that could jeopardize fair investigations. According to lawyer Mykola Myakhov, head of the criminal practice at AZONES Law Firm, Law №12414 remains in effect, allowing the filing of petitions to transfer cases from NABU to another law enforcement body, such as the Prosecutor General’s Office. However, the window for such petitions is time-sensitive — they must be submitted before the new law takes effect, as the head of the prosecution will then have the authority to review such requests. This process creates a potential avenue for influence, especially if the new provisions are implemented swiftly. Western European institutions, including the EU, express concern over this legal ambiguity and highlight the concept of 'retroactive effect.' This means that if a law was in force briefly, documents filed during that period should be processed according to the legislation that was applicable then. Therefore, individuals who managed to submit their petitions before the new law's enactment could have their cases reviewed under previous legal norms. Mykola Myakhov emphasizes that those who acted promptly could secure their rights by petitioning the Prosecutor General before the new regulation fully enters into force. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Parliament has already introduced an urgent draft law №13533 aimed at strengthening the powers of NABU and SAP, but critics warn that it reinstates provisions previously challenged or suspended, such as the requirement for all NABU staff with access to state secrets to pass lie detector tests. Thus, Ukraine’s legal landscape remains fraught with uncertainties and potential loopholes that top corruption officials might leverage. These developments threaten the independence and effectiveness of anti-corruption institutions and complicate the country’s efforts to combat high-level corruption effectively.