Prosecutors must be held accountable for unlawful prosecutions, as this directly follows from the rule of law and due process. If a prosecutor intentionally or through gross negligence initiates a criminal prosecution on the basis of insufficient or falsified evidence, this can lead to serious human rights violations, UNN writes.
However, in practice, such cases are the exception, and another example is the case against former Minister of Infrastructure Volodymyr Omelian, who was publicly accused of a criminal offense, but was fully acquitted by the HACC . UNN asked the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office, which was responsible for overseeing the legality of the actions of NABU detectives in the politician's case, for a comment.
It should be noted that there are three possible forms of liability:
- Disciplinary - prosecutors can be reprimanded, demoted or even fired for violating their duties;
- Criminal - if the prosecutor's actions are qualified as abuse of power or official position, he or she may face a real prison term;
- Civil liability - victims may seek damages in court.
According to the SAPO, the criminal proceedings on charges of former Minister Volodymyr Omelyan were conducted by NABU detectives, and procedural guidance was provided by SAPO prosecutors Vysotska N.V. and Sydorenko V.A
However, none of them have been brought to justice. The SAPO also emphasized that prosecutors are not obliged to apologize for illegal prosecution, as this is not provided for in the Criminal Procedure Code.
At the same time, the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office refused to name the criminal proceedings where the same prosecutors are now overseeing compliance with the law in the investigation of cases and bringing people to justice. They say it is a secret of the investigation.
However, Oleh Shram, a lawyer and former adviser to the Director of the State Bureau of Investigation, said in an exclusive commentary to UNN that the secret of the pre-trial investigation is the factual data on the circumstances of the commission of illegal actions, plans for certain investigative actions, and investigative actions already carried out.
As for which prosecutor supervises the observance of laws in criminal proceedings, such information cannot, in principle, be a secret of the pre-trial investigation
Add
Allegations of bias and political bias of NABU detectives in their investigations have been made repeatedly. Recently, however, they have started to be heard from the bureau's leadership. The reason for this was that anti-corruption activists launched an investigation against NABU First Deputy Director Gizo Uglava. Only after he found himself on the other side of the investigation did he admit that there were serious problems with the investigation conducted by anti-corruption activists and noted that the bureau was not focused on establishing the truth but on achieving “external goals.
There are also concerns about violations of the presumption of innocence by the NABU, as in the cases against Mykola Solskyi and MP Serhiy Kuzminykh.
The Kharkiv Human Rights Group also criticized NABU for statements that violate the presumption of innocence. They believe that the real reason for Solsky's prosecution is the reform of the land market in Ukraine.