Impunity or justice? Delaying cases against officials harms Ukraine's future. It undermines accountability and trust in the system, impacting the nation’s progress.
Criminal cases related to the abuse of power and official position in Ukraine are generating considerable public resonance, especially when it involves officials who, despite facing accusations, continue to fulfill their duties. Such cases necessitate prompt and effective investigations, as delays not only harm the image of state institutions but also negatively impact Ukraine's perception on the international stage, particularly in the context of European integration and cooperation with international partners, writes UNN.
Abuse of power by public servants, particularly officials, significantly affects the political and economic stability of the state. This is especially true when the violations pertain to the abuse of power and official position. The longer these officials remain in their positions, the more their actions undermine public trust in the authorities and increase the risk of repeated abuses.
Former First Deputy Head of the State Bureau of Investigations, Alexander Babikov, warns that an overly rapid investigation into a public official may be perceived as persecution. Therefore, a balanced approach is crucial.
“On one hand, a quick, excessively rapid investigation into criminal cases involving abuses can be viewed as persecution, including for political and other motives, and this risk cannot be overlooked. On the other hand, the need for effective and swift investigations is underscored by the fact that many officials, whose involvement in abuses has been publicly announced in the media, often do not receive a verdict for several years—this indicates absolute impunity,” noted Babikov in an exclusive comment to UNN.
According to him, delays in investigating such criminal cases result in those who know these officials realizing that effective protection through various procedural diversions allows them to evade criminal liability and consequently continue to “serve the country,” earning money and influencing, among other things, the pre-trial investigation bodies and the court.
“Impunity, therefore, breeds even greater legal nihilism in the country,” emphasized Babikov.
The Zima Case
To effectively counteract the abuse of power, conditions must be established under which investigations are conducted within short time frames. Time limits are important not only for minimizing the harm caused by a potential offender but also for ensuring justice that meets the standards of a legal state. A relevant example is the criminal case regarding possible abuse of power and official position against Alexander Zima, the chief lawyer of the National Bank of Ukraine (NBU).
However, despite the resonance of the case, it has been prolonged, raising additional questions regarding the transparency and effectiveness of the investigations.
The case was opened due to a letter from Zima to the Deposit Guarantee Fund for Individuals. In the document, Zima, who is both the chief lawyer of the NBU and the head of the Administrative Council of the Deposit Guarantee Fund, recommended on behalf of the NBU that the Fund withdraw lawsuits filed by the bank “Concord” against the National Bank of Ukraine.
The lawsuits involved four claims in which “Concord” sought to overturn fines totaling nearly 63.5 million hryvnias. These were filed before the NBU made the decision to liquidate “Concord” and appointed a temporary administration there.
The Fund heeded the recommendation received on behalf of the regulator. The letter contained the digital signature of Alexander Zima, who simultaneously serves as the head of the Administrative Council of the Deposit Guarantee Fund, which appoints and dismisses its leadership.
Thus, Zima likely undermined the independence of the management of the Deposit Guarantee Fund for Individuals, which now negatively affects interactions with international financial institutions. It is not excluded that, for instance, the IMF, due to dissatisfaction with the situation, has begun to actively demand from Ukraine the development of a procedure and the conduct of an open competition for the position of director of the FGWFL.
Moreover, according to Elena Sosedka, co-owner of “Concord,” Zima's directives deprived the bank's shareholders of their constitutional right to a fair trial.
Currently, Zima's case has been transferred from the SBI to the investigation of the Pechersk police department in Kyiv. Law enforcement officials informed UNN that they plan to determine the circle of victims and also interrogate the chief lawyer of the NBU. Additionally, after Zima receives a notice of suspicion, investigators will petition the court to suspend him from performing the duties of the director of the NBU's legal department.
When an official suspected of abuses continues to work, there is a risk of influencing witnesses, hiding evidence, or other forms of obstructing the investigation. Furthermore, such cases can have serious international consequences, as openness and promptness of the investigation are key factors for maintaining Ukraine's partnership relations with foreign states and organizations that provide support to Ukraine.