Ukraine has come to the end of its era of reforms through parallel institutions, particularly in the sphere of anti-corruption, such as the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU). In developed countries, corruption cases are handled by standard investigative bodies, prosecution, and courts. After the Maidan revolution, Ukraine opted to create specialized structures to fight corruption, but this approach from the outset produced conflicts with established institutions.
Recently, NABU's position weakened amid diminishing Western attention toward Ukraine’s internal reforms, the ongoing full-scale war, and lower levels of civil activism. The government’s responses to criticism from anti-corruption activists culminated in a vote by Ukraine’s parliament to dismantle NABU’s independent structure. Now, NABU reports directly to the Prosecutor General, and cases may be reassigned to other law enforcement agencies. This effectively eliminates NABU’s independence—a situation that has sparked debates among experts and the public.
The work of NABU itself was not without issues, including allegations of abuse of power by its staff, though its independence served as a safeguard against high-level corruption schemes. The situation highlights the lack of substantive reform within Ukraine's traditional law enforcement institutions: police reform was left incomplete, the State Bureau of Investigation was formed without serious staffing changes, and the prosecution service remained unreformed. As a result, political leaders retain direct control over law enforcement bodies.
The article notes that scrapping NABU does not guarantee meaningful reforms—no significant overhaul of the prosecution, SBU, or State Bureau of Investigation is underway. The risks and responsibility now rest with the presidential administration, while the notion of independent institutions fades. Ukraine thus returns to a model reminiscent of the “neo-Kuchmism” period, where political favorites play a central role, and real reforms are in doubt.
Looking ahead, the author cautions against overly pessimistic predictions but stresses that without functional independent institutions, anti-corruption work in Ukraine loses effectiveness. The lack of a robust system of checks and balances is now exacerbated by dismantling NABU’s autonomy.
