Search of an NABU Employee Near the Prosecutor General’s Office Building Sparks Controversy: Official Explanations and Criminal Consequences
Ukraine is currently witnessing a highly publicized investigation concerning a recent search conducted on a National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) employee, who, according to official sources, was allegedly observing the building of the Office of the Prosecutor General (OPG).
Reports indicate that law enforcement actions were carried out covertly but have caused significant public and professional concern.
The Office of the Prosecutor General confirmed that around 6:10 in the morning, an unidentified man installed technical surveillance equipment on a canopy above an entrance to a residential building opposite the OPG.
The authorities reported that by 14:53, these devices had been recovered.
During a search, the man identified himself as a NABU staff member and presented his official ID.
He explained his actions as following directives from his leadership but failed to provide clear legal grounds for the installation of the surveillance equipment.
The OPG emphasizes that the surveillance cameras were placed in specially designated locations designed to record entries and exits of all building personnel, a measure that, in wartime conditions, poses a risk of mass data leakage about state institution activities.
Specifically, the equipment was intended to track vehicles, license plates, movements, as well as identify personnel, including those working in the Department for Combating Crime in a war context.
Law enforcement agencies have initiated a criminal investigation under Article 359, Part 2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, related to potentially illegal information gathering, and conducted a search at the residence of one of the suspects.
The investigation is ongoing and has garnered wide societal attention.
Previously, NABU announced a late-night search carried out by special forces and prosecutors from the OPG on an NABU employee, which involved the use of force.
The motivation for the investigative actions was purportedly linked to suspicions that the employee organized surveillance of the OPG building.