Foreign auditors have finally approved the criteria and methodology for evaluating NABU after facing criticism.

The Audit Commission for the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine approved the criteria and methodology for assessing the bureau's effectiveness on November 18. This was reported by the Secretariat of the Commission, as conveyed by UNN.

Details

The audit will cover the period from March 6, 2023 (the date of appointment of the current director) to November 18, 2024 (the date of approval of the criteria and methodology). The document approved by the auditors outlines the objectives, principles, procedures for conducting the assessment, and determining the final conclusion on the effectiveness of NABU's activities, as well as the evaluation criteria.

"During the first audit, the Commission established objective criteria and developed a methodology from scratch to assess the effectiveness of NABU's work over a period of more than a year and a half. Defining objective criteria for measuring effectiveness, especially for an organization like NABU, poses significant challenges, as there is no single, internationally recognized list of benchmarks for assessing the efficiency of anti-corruption agencies. We focus on objective conclusions and actionable recommendations for improving processes, rather than merely evaluating success or failure," noted Robert Westbrooks, the chairman of the Commission for conducting external independent assessments (audits) of NABU's effectiveness.

The criteria and methodology define five dimensions of effectiveness by which NABU's activities will be evaluated, specifically:

-        detection and investigation of high-level corruption - the main indicator of NABU's effectiveness is the quantity and quality of investigations into high-level corruption. However, in practice, the number of convictions in NABU cases is critically low compared to the number of investigations conducted. Experts believe that NABU has "drowned" in its cases because it investigates non-priority and sometimes politically motivated cases, thereby paralyzing its work. Moreover, high-profile accusations from NABU and SAP often end in acquittals, as seen in the case against former Infrastructure Minister Volodymyr Omelyan, whom detectives publicly accused of crimes but failed to prove his guilt in court.

-        integrity, accountability, and transparency - effective internal and external control mechanisms governing the handling of complaints about illegal actions by NABU employees, and timely communication about activities and achievements, provided that appropriate protection of sensitive information is in place, the disclosure of which could harm an investigation. At the same time, human rights defenders are raising alarms due to systematic violations by NABU detectives and SAP prosecutors of the presumption of innocence.

-        leadership, strategy, and resource management - systems for managing knowledge and information to make informed decisions, thorough internal monitoring and evaluation processes, and rational allocation of technical and material resources. At the same time, NABU is "known" for its procurement practices; for instance, detectives wanted to purchase heaters and air conditioners for nearly 1.3 million hryvnias while authorities and international organizations warned about the extremely complex energy situation this winter. Additionally, the bureau will spend over 50 thousand hryvnias on the purchase of three portable weather stations. And these are just a few examples. Furthermore, NABU recently engaged in internal disputes with its former first deputy director, Gizo Uglava, accusing him of violations in carrying out his direct duties. Uglava, in turn, stated that NABU is a politically biased body that is influenced by outside parties.

-        interagency cooperation - coordinated and functional collaboration with key national partner institutions. The bureau demonstrates particular coordination in its work with other anti-corruption agencies. As practice shows, anti-corruption bodies created with a "single intention" turn a blind eye to each other's violations. For example, NABCP records conflicts of interest when NABU detectives order expertise from friendly private entities, particularly concerning LLC "S END D." However, despite this documentation, NABCP refrains from conducting checks.

-        international cooperation - active international cooperation to protect evidence. It is noteworthy that in the shadow report to section 23 "Justice and Fundamental Rights" of the European Commission's report on Ukraine for 2023, it indicates that in several court cases, violations of the presumption of innocence principle were recorded by NABU detectives, who, in public comments and interviews, effectively "designated" individuals as guilty. However, NABU does not respond to such remarks from partners.

It should be noted that last week, the Public Oversight Council criticized the independent audit at NABU for the lack of published criteria and unclear deadlines. The Council even decided to establish a working group to investigate the mechanism and procedure for conducting the audit.

Following the Public Oversight Council's statement, the Commission announced that it had approved the criteria and methodology for the audit.

Reminder

On October 3, NABU finally commenced an external independent audit. International experts conducting the assessment held a closed meeting in Kyiv with representatives of public organizations and other public figures working in the field of preventing and combating corruption. At this meeting, anti-corruption activists and lawyers expressed their concerns regarding the effectiveness of investigations and the transparency of NABU's work.

After receiving the necessary documents, the foreign auditors left Ukraine to develop and approve the criteria and methodology for conducting the evaluation.

Additionally

Recently, the public has accumulated many questions regarding the work of NABU detectives. In particular, statements about the loss of independence of anti-corruption agencies in Ukraine are frequently heard. This was also stated by the recently dismissed first deputy director of the bureau, Gizo Uglava. He has repeatedly hinted that decisions in NABU are made under the influence of external factors rather than based on the law. Among the individuals and institutions he mentioned as exerting this pressure were activists from the Center for Counteracting Corruption (CPC) and the chairman of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Anti-Corruption Policy, who, Uglava noted, previously worked at CPC.

Uglava emphasized that actions against him indicate serious problems in NABU's investigation process, which are focused on achieving external goals rather than establishing the truth.

Lawyers also support this view, stating that the real aim of anti-corruption efforts has shifted from combating corruption to exerting pressure on specific public officials to achieve "external" objectives.

Moreover, human rights defenders are raising alarms due to systematic violations by NABU detectives and SAP prosecutors of the presumption of innocence.

This has been documented, in particular, in the Shadow Report to section 23 "Justice and Fundamental Rights" of the European Commission's report on Ukraine for 2023, prepared by a coalition of public organizations. According to the document, in several court cases, judges noted violations of the presumption of innocence principle by NABU detectives, who in public comments and interviews effectively "designated" individuals as guilty.