Abolishing the independence of NABU and SAP contradicts Ukraine’s anti-corruption movement after the Revolution of Dignity – analysis by Agency for Legislative Initiatives

The Agency for Legislative Initiatives, in its legal analysis, stated that the strengthening of the Prosecutor General’s role under a new law passed by Ukraine’s parliament contradicts the anti-corruption policies implemented since the 2014 Revolution of Dignity.

Legal experts from the Kyiv-based think tank argue that the passage of Bill 12414 represents a significant regression, achieved through procedural violations. They note that Maksym Buzhanskyy, a deputy from the presidential “Servant of the People” party, introduced the controversial amendments at the last minute into a bill with an entirely different original purpose.

The bill was initially designed to improve the state’s response to missing persons cases during Russia’s war and provide legal aid to their families during martial law. However, the last-minute amendments fundamentally altered its content, granting the Prosecutor General sweeping new powers to:

• Reassign the powers of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) prosecutors to others.

• Demand case materials and transfer National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) investigations to other pre-trial bodies.

• Issue written directives to NABU that are mandatory for execution.

• Unilaterally reassign criminal proceedings under NABU’s jurisdiction to other agencies.

Analysts explain that this contradicts the last decade of reforms, which focused on providing the head of SAPO and the agency itself with high levels of procedural and institutional independence. They also highlight that, unlike prosecutors in the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO), SAPO prosecutors have passed rigorous selection processes involving international partners.

A key safeguard for NABU’s independence was the legal provision preventing its cases from being transferred to other bodies, such as the State Bureau of Investigation (DBR) or the National Police of Ukraine. The analysts explain that if the document supported by the Verkhovna Rada takes effect, this safeguard will disappear.

The changes also affect how criminal cases are closed. The new law will allow high-level suspects, such as deputies or judges, to petition directly for the closure of investigations against them.

Furthermore, the law introduces a simplified, non-competitive procedure for transferring individuals into the Prosecutor General’s Office during martial law, even from outside the prosecution system. Analysts at the Agency for Legislative Initiatives argued that it is necessary to transfer prosecutors from district and regional prosecutors’ offices, because auditing NABU proceedings requires many resources.

In its conclusion, the think tank stated that recent events demonstrate the authorities’ desire to “manually control” criminal proceedings, including those related to corruption.

“The events of recent days regarding the discreditation of NABU and SAPO in the information space only strengthen this conviction,” the analysts added.

The Director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU), Semen Kryvonos, and the Head of the Prosecutor General’s Office, Oleksandr Lysenko, have publicly called on President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to veto bill №12414, passed by parliament on July 22, 2025, which subordinates the NABU and the SAPO to the Prosecutor General’s Office.

By way of background, earlier, ZMINA reported that anti-corruption activism has long been one of the most dangerous forms of activism in Ukraine, even before the full-scale Russian invasion.

More than half of Ukrainians consider corruption one of the country’s most significant problems and rate the fight against embezzlement and abuse of office as being poorly implemented.