US, UK calls Ukraine to elect anti-corruption prosecutor, with no effect

The U.S. embassy in Kyiv called on Dec. 29 for Ukraine
to speed up with the selection of the Specialized Anti-corruption Prosecutor
(SAP). It called via twitter for the SAP selection commission members “to
return to work, respect their own procedures and do what’s right for the
Ukrainian people by certifying their own SAP selection”. It also called to “not
allow corrupt external forces to block the work” that the commission was
entrusted to finish. The same day, U.K. ambassador to Ukraine Melinda Simmons
tweeted that the continued delay in appointing a SAP “is avoidable bad news for
Ukraine”. She also called the selection committee members to “finally certify
the winner and help strengthen this vital independent anticorruption
institution.”

Recall, on Dec. 21, the selection commission failed to officially appoint
Oleksandr Klymenko, who gained most points in the selection process, as the
Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor. At the meeting, the simple voting to
approve the results of the selection process did not gain enough votes due to
stubborn resistance on the part of the commission members to raise their hands.
The commission’s next meeting on Dec. 24 yielded the same voting result.
Klymenko, who is a detective of the Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU),
is not a comfortable candidate for the Ukrainian president and his entourage.
Klymenko was a member of the NABU team that investigated the corruption of Oleh
Tatarov, who is the deputy head of the office of President Zelensky.

The NGO Anticorruption Action Center (AntAC) wrote on
Dec. 29 that the government is trying to undermine the results of the SAP
selection. In particular, the General Prosecutor’s Office has re-launched a
special vetting of Andriy Syniuk, the SAP candidate who ranked second by the
selection commission and who is “controlled” by Zelensky’s entourage, according
to the AntAC. The Center stressed that the illegality of such re-vetting was
confirmed by the National Agency for Prevention of Corruption, and that the
selection process winner Klymenko refused to be re-vetted (all the SAP
candidates underwent a standard vetting procedure in spring). If Klymenko gives
permission for the re-vetting, he could fail to be re-vetted due to artificial
barriers, the AntAC explained.

Alexander Paraschiy: The
pressure from the U.S. and U.K. embassies is not working – Zelensky’s entourage
is doing everything to appoint Syniuk as the specialized anticorruption
prosecutor. Such stubborn attempts confirm that Syniuk is a comfortable
prosecutor for Zelensky. If so, Ukraine’s entire anti-corruption infrastructure
won’t work independently. Perhaps the only way to influence this process is
direct talks by top Western officials with Zelensky on this issue.

Clearly, for Zelensky it is much more comfortable
to execute his power (which goes beyond the constitution, which stipulates
Ukraine is a parliamentary-presidential republic, meaning that the parliament
is the first) with use of corrupt ties and means. An independent anti-corruption
infrastructure will put this system at risk, meaning that the president’s power
will be much weaker. In this sense, Zelensky, who presented himself as a new
face in politics, does not differ from the “old politicians” like Poroshenko or
Yanukovych. This is perhaps one of the biggest disappointments about Zelensky,
and this is what will significantly undermine his chance to be re-elected in
2024.