Ukraine: a step back in the fight against corruption?
For the first time since the start of the war, protests have broken out in Ukraine, directed against a new law concerning the hitherto independent anti-corruption bodies. The National Anti-Corruption Bureau (Nabu) and the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office are to be put under the control of the Prosecutor General's Office. Observers criticise President Zelensky and see Ukraine on a dangerous path towards authoritarianism.
Penalised for targeting Zelensky's protegees
The Neue Zürcher Zeitung calls for a clear response from the EU:
“Exactly why Zelensky has chosen to squander his political capital is a mystery. The official reason - Russia allegedly influencing anti-corruption investigators - is likely just a pretext. The real explanation is no doubt that Nabu has targeted too many of Zelensky's political friends. In other words, the bureau was doing exactly what it was created to do. ... With all due respect for Zelensky's achievements as a wartime president, it would be wrong for the international community to look the other way now. The EU must make it clear that unless Tuesday's mistake is corrected the path to accession will be blocked.”
Loss of credibility
Dagens Nyheter says the Ukrainian president's reputation has been tarnished:
“The situation is extremely embarrassing for Zelensky. ... He is frantically pushing for Ukraine's accession to the EU and making emotional speeches about Ukraine's moral right to membership. But his actions are reaffirming the problem that the EU has always been aware of but preferred to keep quiet about because of the Russian war of aggression: corruption continues to be a major problem in Ukraine. Outwardly, it was manageable as long as Zelensky was able to give the impression that he was fighting corruption as hard as he could. This image has now been destroyed.”
Time for some friendly advice
The West is giving Zelensky too much leeway, Novinky.cz complains:
“As friends and allies of Ukraine, we are only too happy to embrace and pat its president on the back. What we don't do, however, is ask him any awkward questions, let alone issue ultimatums, because we feel it would be somehow inappropriate as long as war is raging in his country. But in fact the opposite is the case. It's high time to do what a true friend should do: call Zelensky and tell him the uncomfortable truth – that we support democracy and civil society, not autocrats. We must unequivocally stand behind Ukrainian society. Against the aggressor Russia, and now also against Ukraine's untouchables.”
String-puller Yermak too powerful
Zelensky's bureau chief Andriy Yermak has an inordinate amount of influence, says Jutarnji list:
“Too much power has been concentrated in the hands of Yermak and the Presidential Office. Zelensky is giving him, as well as others in this office, powers to which he is not entitled even in a state of emergency. Critics of this move are being offhandedly dismissed as pro-Russian. The responsibility for this long-term ill-advised move lies with Zelensky, and Ukraine will pay the price because many are now questioning whether they want to give money to a country that has given up the fight against corruption. A country that the head of the Presidential Office rules from the shadows, while the president is the face that attracts worldwide sympathy.”
Betraying Euromaidan
Ukrainska Pravda's editor-in-chief Sevgil Musayeva sees a clear shift towards authoritarianism:
“This is the dismantling of the anti-corruption infrastructure created after the Revolution of Dignity [Euromaidan] - established by civil society, under pressure from international partners and at the request of Ukrainians who wanted an honest, transparent state. And who gave their lives for this demand. Today, this choice has been betrayed. This decision means a loss of direction, a mockery of memory - and the beginning of a decline into authoritarianism, where power is concentrated in one person's hands, where there is no balance, no accountability, and no fear of being exposed.”
Ukraine becoming more Russian
The reform makes Ukraine a little more like its hostile neighbour, complains The Spectator:
“The battle for Ukraine's future is being fought not only on the battlefield, but also within its democratic institutions. One of these battles was lost on Tuesday. ... The law brings Ukrainians closer to the country they desperately want to leave. If it is not rejected, President Zelensky risks driving the people back to Independence Square for another Maidan uprising. This moment could be closer than he thinks.”
A risky move for Zelensky
With this move President Zelensky is alienating not only the Ukrainians but also his Western partners, writes Rzeczpospolita:
“It's difficult to predict the consequences that the Ukrainian leadership will face as a result of the latest decisions. Volodymyr Zelensky will soon have to deal with the reactions of Ukrainian society, his political opponents and the democratic world that supports Ukraine. Especially as Kyiv still has a long way to go in the fight against corruption. In last year's Transparency International ranking, Ukraine was basically on a par with Algeria.”
Kyiv distancing itself from the EU
La Repubblica concurs that the country is jeopardising its effort to move closer to the EU:
“The fight against the endemic corruption that has kept Ukraine in a stranglehold for decades has led to improvements in recent years. It is one of the key conditions for Kyiv's accession to the European Union. So it's no coincidence that EU Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos yesterday expressed her concern about this counter-reform, which expands the president's powers and represents a 'serious step back' from the progress Kyiv has made in the past years.”
The fight goes on
In a commentary for the Unian website, political expert Vitaly Kulyk sheds no tears for the National Anti-Corruption Bureau:
“Its results: not a single case of high-level corruption that would have led to a conviction. Overall, the existing anti-corruption architecture has proven to be ineffective. This is why I am not joining in the general lamentation over draft law No. 12414 and am not 'burying' either the fight against corruption or EU integration. Because the US and the EU will continue to demand transparency and more efficiency in the use of aid funding. This government will therefore still be forced to create mechanisms and an appropriate model for the anti-corruption infrastructure.”