For years economic progress of Ukraine was impeded by systemic corruption, which offset the positive effects from many of the hard-earned and difficult reforms.
Five years after the EuroMaidan Revolution, which ousted President Viktor Yanukovych, present-day Ukraine is still struggling to resolve the issue. Two recent events provide an excellent illustration of state of affairs in this long struggle.
First. As the presidential elections are approaching, former head of the State Fiscal Service Roman Nasirov announced he would run for the highest office. On January 16 he filed the documents to the electoral commission and was shortly after officially registered as a presidential candidate.
When I served as minister of finance and strived to reform the endemically corrupt tax system, Nasirov was the main obstacle and loyal representative of the corrupt establishment. He was actively blocking the set of preventive measures, targeted in reducing the scope for corruption, including including sabotaging the automatic value-added tax refunds system, which my team and I were introducing. His attendance of the Jan. 20, 2017, inauguration ceremony of U.S. President Donald J. Trump infuriated the Ukrainian public, who believe that a worse candidate could hardly be found for such a role. My attempts to remove him from the office were blocked, as he enjoyed protection from the political elite in exchange for the rent collection that he warranted in their interests. Nevertheless, that was the only solution to proceed with reforms in the State Fiscal Service. Thus, I publicly demanded his resignation and submitted requests for investigation of his corrupt activities into the newly created National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, as no old institutions would take any unbiased actions.
In early 2017, the bureau arrested Nasirov for embezzlement that caused budget losses in the amount around $75 million. This was the first time in the history of Ukraine when acting high-level official was arrested on corruption charges. Hundreds of people gathered around the court where his detention case was heard, in the attempt to prevent court giving Nasirov bail, after which he would have most certainly escaped from the country.
After two years, he is still not brought to accountability. For more than one year, the court has been just listening to the text of indictment – and just half of it is read. It is not an indication of the large size of the case but rather the lack of willingness to proceed with the trial. Society is shocked with deliberate dragging on the proceedings.
One may think that this embarrassment would have been enough to have him sacked, but it was not. The resistance of the establishment only strengthened as giving up would have created a dangerous precedent. Luckily I found an easier procedure to remove him and had him fired for holding dual citizenship (Nasirov also possessed British passport) which is not a crime but is explicitly forbidden by law for civil servants. This is like at the beginning of 20th century, when the gangster Al Capone was arrested for tax evasion, but not for murders and other serious crimes.
However, in December 2018 an administrative court reinstated Nasirov in his position. It refused to accept official letters from the British authorities confirming his British citizenship as insufficient and not trustworthy. Indeed, not the best way to improve international relations.
Moreover, winged by impunity, recently Nasirov has intensified his business activities. Feeling confident he renew attempts to regain control of the historic building in the Kyiv center that he privatized several years ago for the price at least 20 times lower than market level in a prearranged deal with authorities.
Nasirov really does not deserve attention, he just one of hundreds – but his case became a litmus test as to the seriousness of the government intentions to fight corruption.
The case also serves as a verdict to Ukraine’s judiciary – since 2014 courts proved to be the biggest and most faithful allies of the corrupt officials in their attempts to save impunity and the status quo.Ukrainians keep naming lack of proper punishment measures as key precondition why grand corruption is still there.
Based on this story one may think Ukraine completely lost its fight against corruption. However, this is a wrong conclusion. It was the Anti-Corruption Bureau which played a key role in Nasirov’s case. Despite constant attempts of the political establishment to gain control over it, the institution performs independently and professionally, not least due to the strong support of the international partners.
This brings us to the second important event that took place on Jan. 28 – a significant (though far from final) victory in the struggle over creation of the independent anti-corruption court. International partners and Ukrainian civil activists have been keeping firm control over the selection process of judges. The council of international experts, which under International Monetary Fund pressure was empowered with vetoing the questionable judicial candidates, succeeded in blockingmost of the dubious ones, who jeopardized the independence of the future court.
Six foreign experts stood firmly against pressure exerted by the candidates and the judicial council, and in total, they banned 42 out of 49 candidates, with seven others having refuted the doubts regarding them. The significance of this result is especially great comparing to the outcome of the 2017 selection of the judges to Supreme Court. The independent experts propose to disqualify a number of the candidates as untrustworthy, but in around 60 percent of cases their position was dismissed and overruled.
A dependent court cannot deliver fair trials and could easily become an instrument of political prosecution and make the work of other anti-corruption institutions senseless. Though a recently demonstrated strong and impartial position of international experts cannot not secure everlasting independence of the anti-corruption court – it was clearly a crucial milestone in building a strong anti-corruption institutions. When the anti-corruption court is launched, it will make sure that corrupt officials like Nasirov will receive a fair trial and corresponding punishment. That would finally deliver upon pressing demands of the society for justice. The war over corruption will be won.
Oleksandr Danyliuk was Ukraine’s finance minister in 2016-2018 and the head of Ukraine’s delegation to the Council of Europe’s Group of States Against Corruption from 2014 to 2015.
