Three years passed since the beginning of the Revolution of Dignity.
Disrespect for citizens and terrible corruption were two reasons for people’s anger in 2013. The people were ready to lose their lives for the sake of changes in the country. The former President Viktor Yanukovych was recognized the most corrupt official in the world, according to the Unmask the Corrupt results.
The politicians who supported the Revolution promised changes. Now they have the power. Did they keep their promises and implement the reforms? Let’s see.

Corrupt officials away!
After the Revolution of Dignity, Ukraine has received a chance for anti-corruption reforms.
On Oct. 14, 2014 the Verkhovna Rada approved a set of anti-corruption laws. The laws were developed by the progressive anti-corruption experts, including Transparency International Ukraine. They established the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, the National Agency on Corruption Prevention, which should introduce e-declaration for officials etc. The Anti-Corruption Strategy for 2014-2017 and state programs for its implementation were also approved.
However, it was clear that neither the laws, nor the strategy would be implemented. The system resisted the changes, and it meant overlapping corruption channels enriching many officials.
So, civil society came. With the support of the international donors, anti-corruption activists worked in several directions. There were public statements and meetings with officials, protest meetings, numerous interviews and press conferences for media, printing information products, training events to explain the society why the country needed changes.
The authorities tried to control processes of establishing independent anti-corruption institutions in details, promote the people who were allegedly controlled.
For example, during an online voting for the Civil Oversight Council at NABU, the vote was not protected technically. There was cheating with votes at the web-site and the society demanded a “rerun.”
Establishment of NACP was a fight at each stage – from formation of the civil part of the Competition Committee, which should select the NACP members to election of the top management. Transparency International Ukraine even had to initiate court appeals because of opacity. In the first of the cases, the court supported the authorities. The process of NACP establishment moved only after intervention of the prime minister and president. In the second case, the decision is still pending.
Another important stage for civil activists was introduction of e-declaration. When high-ranking officials understood that they would necessarily show their fabulous assets to the society, they resisted. Some MPs went to the Constitutional Court trying to prove that the law violated their rights. Other MPs tried to amend the law in intention to neutralize and reduce e-declaration.
However, we have managed to introduce e-declaration. And the society saw billions of cash, square meters of real estate and kilos of gold in the officials’ declarations. It became clear why the officials were so afraid.
Thus, as a result of hard and persistent cooperation between civil society and authorities in the last three years they transparently established NABU, Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, and NACP.
The first wave of e-declaration of officials’ assets took place, implementation of the law on state finance of political parties started. A number of state registers were opened to public (beneficiaries, land lots, rights to movables and immovable etc.). They formed a unified portal of using public funds by state establishment and enterprises.
Another big win is introduction of the e-bids system ProZorro at the national level, which has received the international award Procurement Leader Award. The system functions from February 12, 2015 (21 months). It was used for 324,150 procurements amounting to Hr 177.38 billion. The estimated saving amounts to Hr 6.65 billion. Break the ice!

Loopholes for criminals
According to the research of Transparency International Ukraine for two years only one out of five officials convicted for bribing was imprisoned. The rest were punished by a fine or probation. In 9 percent cases courts justify the bribers. Herewith, general statistics of acquittals in Ukraine is less than 1 percent. It means that courts are reluctant to bring corrupt officials behind bars. It is not surprising because the courts themselves are called the most corrupt institutions in the country. In addition, there are no high-ranking officials among the convicted. The cases against officials taking positions higher than city mayors are not brought to the court.
That is why Ukraine needed NABU and Special Prosecutor’s Office. At the moment, NABU has 245 proceedings (about 40 of them have been forwarded to the court), has announced 100 notices of suspicion, there are 34 indictments.
The first year of work of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau proved necessity to extend its powers. Namely – wiretaps shall be independent. Now detectives are forced to apply to the Security Service of Ukraine for help. Such procedure carries certain threats for investigation. After bringing in another structure to the investigation of a certain criminal case, there is one more link for a possible information leak that can break the case. So, it is advisable to lay full responsibility on one law enforcement body.
In addition, there are concerns that the cases investigated by NABU will “melt” in court. That is why Ukraine needs an Anti-Corruption Court.
“Anti-corruption court will help to break the chain of impunity for corrupt officials,” Chairman of Transparency International Jose Ugaz said during his visit to Ukraine.
It would be great to select human resources on an open competition basis for anti-corruption courts. However, it is important that the selection committee members have a solid reputation. And they should receive recommendations from the embassies of the countries with developed economies, because that’s where the corrupt officials usually try to take their money to.
After the publication of e-declarations, the National Agency for Corruption Prevent faced a practical problem: how to process so much data and detect offenders who have failed to declare their whole income or whose actual lifestyle does not correspond to the declared assets.
NACP has no sufficient tools to compare the declarations with the data in other registers. In particular, there is a problem with access to the data of the State Fiscal Service, the data containing banking secrets and the registers of flights. Similarly, NACP has no sophisticated tools to verify data on beneficiaries of companies.
It’s important to establish the State Investigation Bureau. This body shall take the investigation function from the General Prosecutor’s Office. The State Investigation Bureau will combat corruption at levels of the state machine, leaving the higher levels to NABU. The Bureau wasn’t established yet because the committee in charge of selecting its members hasn’t been effective. Experts see the political involvement in their work.
We are disturbed by the General Prosecutor’s Office announcing that it will transfer the investigation functions to the State Investigation Bureau until 2019.
Sixteen percent of Ukrainians say they are ready to report corruption to the authorities. Comparing to 35 percent citizens who do not believe that something can change, it is not a big number. However, even theses brave people don’t have sufficient protection from the state. A law protecting the whistleblowers needs to be adopted – it is among the international obligations of Ukraine.
Thanks to the pressure of civil society and journalists, the authorities still have not forgotten and neglected the promises given to Maidan. On the anniversary of the Revolution of Dignity we can say – the changes take place and they are significant. We have no way back. If so many people want changes, the country must change.

Yaroslav Yurchyshyn is the executive director at Transparency International Ukraine.