Ukrainian government crosses red line with anti-graft law – analyst
global.espreso.tv
Fri, 25 Jul 2025 19:32:00 +0300

That’s the view of journalist Vitaliy Portnikov, who shared his opinion on Espreso TV.“Perhaps the authors of the law on NABU and SAPO didn’t believe that it could jeopardize security assistance to Ukraine. Maybe they see anti-corruption investigations as one issue and military support as another—after all, without that aid, Ukraine could lose the war. That seems strange to me. It suggests a disconnect from reality,” Portnikov said. “Because there are red lines. For nearly three and a half years, there were no protests in Ukraine, even though the government made plenty of decisions people disliked.”According to Portnikov, most citizens accepted those decisions out of a sense that the government and society needed to remain united in Ukraine’s war for survival. But by weakening key institutions in this way, he warns, Ukraine risks weakening itself—and potentially disappearing from the political map altogether.“That’s why people were willing to overlook decisions that didn’t seem right, competent, or realistic. But now it’s fair to say the government has crossed certain red lines,” Portnikov said.He emphasized that the issue isn’t really about the effectiveness of the anti-corruption bodies or whether they’re investigating anyone close to the president. “In recent years, we’ve actually seen pretty solid cooperation between NABU, SAPO, and the government. I don’t believe these agencies posed any serious threat to the president’s inner circle. To a large extent, they’ve become part of the law enforcement hierarchy.”Still, Portnikov believes NABU and SAPO have become “fetishized”—symbolically important far beyond their practical function.“These institutions are a fetish for a part of Ukrainian society and our Western allies. Stripping them of their independence isn’t really about how effective they are—it’s not even about fighting corruption anymore. It’s about that fetish.”He continued: “When you have something that’s become symbolic—something that’s tied to public trust, to international aid, to European integration—even if it’s not functionally central to the state, why would you try to dismantle it in a single day without leaving room for public debate? Maybe if the bill had been discussed for a few weeks, the authorities would have realized how crucial the independence of these institutions is to the public. Sure, around 70% of Ukrainians may not trust NABU or SAPO, but they do trust the fact that those agencies are independent. So why strip them of the one thing that makes them valuable to society—even if society doesn’t love them? There’s just no logic to it,” Portnikov concluded.Ukraine tightens control over anti-corruption agenciesOn July 22, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy signed a bill passed by the Verkhovna Rada that weakens the authority of Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), subordinating them to the Prosecutor General.The bill's official status on the parliament website changed multiple times—first marked as signed by the president, then with the signature removed, and eventually restored.After the vote in parliament, thousands of Ukrainians in major cities staged peaceful protests, urging Zelenskyy to veto the bill, which significantly limits the powers of the country’s top anti-graft institutions.The European Union expressed serious concern over the law—officially known as Bill No. 12414—which it says threatens the independence of NABU and SAPO. According to European Commission spokesperson Guillaume Mercier, the two agencies are “key pillars” of Ukraine’s anti-corruption architecture and must remain autonomous to retain public trust and advance EU integration.European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen personally demanded clarification from Zelenskyy, stressing that compromising on the rule of law is unacceptable—especially given Ukraine’s EU candidacy.EU Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos called the law a “serious step backward” that could damage Ukraine’s prospects for accession. France and Germany also voiced concern, calling on Kyiv to reconsider the legislation and preserve institutional safeguards.In Brussels, there is growing consensus that the law undermines Ukraine’s institutional resilience, democratic path, and Western support—especially at a time of war and amid EU accession negotiations.On July 24, a group of Ukrainian lawmakers introduced an alternative bill aimed at restoring NABU and SAPO’s independence.That same day, President Zelenskyy endorsed a separate draft law that, according to his office, would strengthen the rule-of-law system and safeguard the independence of anti-corruption institutions. The new bill was submitted to the Rada later that day. Both NABU and SAPO confirmed they were involved in drafting the proposal, which is said to restore their procedural powers and guarantees.
Latest news
