Rada loses parliamentary control over law enforcement officers - expert

The Verkhovna Rada currently has no influence on law enforcement agencies, although according to the law, it can call managers for a report and even make personnel decisions. This is also shown by recent events, when Prosecutor General Andrey Kostin and NABU director Semyon Krivonos ignored calls to the parliament. This opinion was expressed in an exclusive comment to UNN by political analyst Igor Reuterovich.

"The parliament had no control over these bodies. That is, yes – according to the law, it has it, it can exercise parliamentary control, raise and ask questions, and even make personnel decisions, but in reality, the parliament has no influence on these bodies today. Since their activities are largely coordinated by the OP, partly by the Cabinet of ministers, they are extremely careless about their duties to come and report to people's deputies," the expert said.

At the same time, he noted that people's deputies cannot formulate their demand in such a way as to force the heads of law enforcement agencies to come to the Parliament and report.

"Due to a certain fragmentation and lack of just political will. Because we understand that if they decided this, the mono – majority could at least call them without any problems, if they raised the issue harshly. But they do not ask questions harshly, that they understand that they will not get the answers they expect," Reuterovich believes.

Recall

Last week, NABU director Semyon Kryvonos refused to attend a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on anti-corruption policy to be heard about the progress of the investigation into the leak of information from NABU. The head of the anti-corruption committee Anastasia Radina believesthat the refusal of the NABU director to come to the committee may be related to the release of a new journalistic investigation about possible information leaks involving Kryvonos directly.

Add

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine is "known" for its ability to loudly announce the exposure of another scheme and announce suspicion to a top official. However, these cases often fall apart in the courts or do not even reach there.

A clear example is the criminal proceedings against former Infrastructure Minister Vladimir Omelyan. Both cases fell apart in the courts. However, the NABU did not officially apologize to the ex-minister for illegal criminal prosecution and damage to business reputation.

Another recent "high-profile" case of NABU, which raises more and more questions, is the criminal proceedings against the former minister of Agrarian Policy Mykola Solsky.

The case of anti-corruption officers concerns a dispute over land plots in the Sumy region, but, as it turned out, neither he nor affiliated persons have the incriminated land. Law enforcement officers, at the request of UNN, did not specify what exactly the ex-minister took possession of in this case. Moreover, the detectives tried to "merge" the examination, which they themselves ordered and which, obviously, was supposed to indicate Solsky's innocence. However, loud statements have already become the reason for the breakdown of negotiations with the poles.