The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) is facing an unprecedented level of scrutiny and pressure. Leading Ukrainian Telegram channels have launched a coordinated media campaign against NABU, with over 900 negative posts accumulating 250 million views within nine months. This media assault follows NABU's investigations into corruption, particularly in the energy sector. European Commissioner Marta Kos has expressed concern over the political and legislative pressure on NABU, highlighting potential setbacks in Ukraine's EU accession process. The Verkhovna Rada’s adoption of draft law No. 12414, which undermines NABU’s independence, has also raised alarms about compromising anti-corruption efforts and the rule of law in Ukraine.
What is causing the media campaign against NABU?
The media campaign against NABU is linked to its diligent investigations into corruption, especially in the energy sector. This has triggered a backlash from influential Telegram channels aiming to discredit the bureau, suggesting they are acting coordinatedly and possibly at the influence of vested interests threatened by NABU's findings.
How many negative posts against NABU were detected?
Reports indicate that in a span of nine months, there have been nearly 900 negative posts about NABU published on leading Ukrainian Telegram channels, collectively amassing over 250 million views. This coordinated attack signifies organized efforts to undermine the bureau's credibility.
What is the European Union's stance on the pressure on NABU?
The European Union, through Commissioner Marta Kos, has expressed serious concerns about the ongoing political and legislative pressures on NABU and other anti-corruption bodies. Such actions pose a risk to Ukraine's aspirations for EU membership, as maintaining independent anti-corruption institutions is crucial for European integration.
What legislative changes are threatening NABU's independence?
The Verkhovna Rada has passed draft law No. 12414, which effectively eliminates the procedural independence of NABU and the SAPO, subordinating them to the Prosecutor General. This legislative change is seen as a direct threat to the autonomy of anti-corruption bodies in Ukraine, undermining years of anti-corruption achievements.
How has NABU responded to attacks from Ukrainian authorities?
NABU has continually highlighted the challenges posed by both media campaigns and legislative amendments. It maintains that these external pressures compromise its ability to operate independently and effectively tackle corruption. Despite these challenges, NABU persists in its mission, wary of the legal and governmental maneuvers jeopardizing its efforts.
