The law, recently adopted by the Ukrainian parliament and signed by the president, now gives the Attorney General a central role in seizing assets in corruption cases. Previously, anti-corruption agencies had more autonomous powers. The new model is intended to prevent fraud and abuse of power, but has instead raised many concerns.
The core criticism is that the two main anti-corruption bodies, NABU and SAPO, lose their effectiveness. They may only seize property when explicitly authorized by the Attorney General. Opponents argue this makes them dependent on political control, thereby compromising their independence.
The European Commission has raised tough questions about the law's impact on the rule of law and the independence of these institutions. The EU emphasizes that a credible approach to fighting corruption remains a fundamental prerequisite for further accession negotiations with Ukraine. It also pointed to previous agreements in which Ukraine committed to strengthening its anti-corruption policies.
From Brussels, appreciation is expressed for Ukraine's commitment that the parliament is willing to implement amendments. Ukrainian officials stated that the EU's concerns are being taken seriously and that the new law will be improved. The precise powers of the involved institutions and the role of the Attorney General will also be reviewed.
The situation has sparked debate within Ukraine about balancing corruption-fighting efforts with protection against abuse of power within the judiciary. Supporters of the law argue that stricter control mechanisms are necessary to prevent arbitrariness and misuse of authority. Opponents fear the reform will be used to influence investigations.
The controversy arises at a moment when Ukraine aims to present itself as a reliable candidate for EU membership. Brussels expects candidate countries to fully uphold the principles of the rule of law. Any obstacles to the independence of judicial institutions are seen as serious barriers to further integration.
The coming weeks will be decisive for the course Ukraine takes. Although concrete amendments have yet to be presented, it is clear the country is under increased scrutiny. Both domestic pressure and international expectations are forcing Kyiv to revise its anti-corruption legislation.