By Dan Peleschuk
KYIV (Reuters) -A row between top Ukrainian law enforcement agencies that sparked a political crisis in July flared up again this week after the SBU security service accused anti-corruption watchdogs of deliberately targeting a former high-ranking agent.
The public showdown between the agencies first erupted after the SBU arrested two anti-graft officials for suspected ties to Russia, at a time when Kyiv is seeking to prove to European partners that it is tackling corruption even as it fights a war.
The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) on Tuesday brought charges against the SBU’s former cyber-security chief of illegal enrichment, alleging that he had obtained a Kyiv apartment at a knockdown price with illicit funds and had falsely declared it.
The SBU responded swiftly, saying the accusation, rooted in a 2024 investigative report by Ukrainian media, was baseless and amounted to “revenge” for its own prosecution of the NABU officials. NABU has not publicly commented on that assertion.
The case against the NABU officials was part of a wave of SBU searches and arrests that preceded a decision by lawmakers to curb the independence of the watchdog and its sister agency, SAPO, which have stepped up their work since Russia’s invasion.
The move against the agencies sparked a public outcry and criticism from Kyiv’s international partners, forcing President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, whose ruling party had fast-tracked the measures, to reverse course and reinstate their powers.
The wartime spat has highlighted the tensions between largely unreformed legacy agencies such as the SBU and fledgling bodies like NABU granted new powers, some experts say.
The SBU, effectively the successor to the Soviet-era KGB, is a vast militarised agency whose functions range from anti-terrorism and counterintelligence to battlefield raids and long-range drone strikes on Russia.
While widely praised for its role in Kyiv’s war effort against Moscow, it has also faced accusations of carrying out political orders, including spying on investigative journalists.
‘POLARISED’ LAW ENFORCEMENT
NABU and SAPO were set up with help from Ukraine’s international partners after a 2014 uprising toppled a pro-Russian leader and set the country on a pro-Western course.
The watchdogs’ work is closely followed by Western allies, who are pressuring Kyiv to tackle its poor record on corruption in order to be able one day to join the European Union.
Investigating crimes with more independence than most other state bodies, NABU and SAPO are generally held in high regard by Ukrainians, but have been targeted by what supporters say are officials irked by their efforts.
Their directors are chosen by an internationally supervised committee, while the SBU chief is appointed by the president.
Lawmaker Andrii Osadchuk, first deputy head of parliament’s law enforcement committee, said competition among Ukrainian agencies was not new and that casting their relationship as a feud would be helpful to Russia.
However, he added that all sides face heightened pressure to remain professional following the flare-up in July.
“Right now, the heads of law enforcement agencies and the prosecutor’s office have a huge responsibility to ensure that officers act like officers, and not politicians or public activists.”
Yevhen Krapyvin, of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives think-tank in Kyiv, said the standoff underlined the “polarisation” of agencies which can lead to distrust.
“I’m convinced that this story is not over,” he said.
(Reporting by Dan PeleschukEditing by Gareth Jones)
Comments