Employees of the Prosecutor General’s Office on Aug. 5 raided the premises of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, accusing it of carrying out illegal wiretapping.
The move is the latest twist in a conflict between the Prosecutor General’s Office, an institution heavily dependent on President Petro Poroshenko, and the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, which is seen as more independent. Previously the Prosecutor General’s Office had also refused to transfer some high-profile cases to the bureau.
Critics see the raid as an attempt by Poroshenko’s loyalists to crack down on the bureau’s independence.
Larysa Sargan, a spokeswoman for Prosecutor General Yury Lutsenko, told the Kyiv Post that the illegal wiretapping had been carried out as part of a case against Oleksandr Kolesnyk, a deputy prosecutor of Kyiv Oblast suspected of stealing sugar worth Hr 300 million ($12 million).
Lutsenko claimed that the bureau had illegally wiretapped an individual who had nothing to do with the case.
But Daria Manzhura, the bureau’s spokeswoman, told the Kyiv Post that all wiretapping carried out by the anti-corruption body was legal.
Furthermore, the bureau argued that the Pechersk Court’s warrant authorizing the searches was illegal, since it does not specify either the names of those wiretapped and the detectives involved, or the relevant criminal case. The warrant, which was published on the bureau’s site, effectively gives prosecutors sweeping powers to search any premises it likes and seize any documents, the graft-fighting body said.
The searches were carried out by Dmytro Sus, a controversial prosecutor suspected of having ties to lawmakers Ihor Kononenko and Oleksandr Hranovsky – Poroshenko’s “grey cardinals,” who have been accused of large-scale corruption. They deny the accusations of graft and interfering with the law enforcement system.
The strana.ua news site reported, citing its sources at the Prosecutor General’s Office, that the bureau had allegedly been wiretapping Hranovsky. But Sargan, the Prosecutor General’s Office spokeswoman, said the reports about Hranovsky being wiretapped were false.
Civic activists have been urging Lutsenko to abolish Sus’ department, which is accused of fabricating political cases on behalf of Poroshenko’s allies, but he has so far failed to do so.
And another ally of Kononenko and Hranovsky, Pavlo Demchyna, was appointed first deputy chief of the Security Service of Ukraine last month.
Viktor Chumak, an independent lawmaker, wrote on Facebook he believed prosecutors’ aim was to block the passage of a law giving the bureau the right to independently wiretap suspects without the Security Service of Ukraine’s assistance. Currently, the graft-fighting agency has to use the security service’s wiretapping facilities, which undermines the bureau’s independence.
Poroshenko has also rejected proposals to give the bureau wiretapping powers.
Sergii Leshchenko, a reformist lawmaker from the Petro Poroshenko Bloc, argued on Facebook that the raid was corrupt officials’ revenge against the National Anti-Corruption Bureau for investigating their schemes.
The bureau has pursued cases against Kononenko, Hranovsky, ex-lawmaker Mykola Martynenko, parliamentarian Serhiy Pashynsky, and other politicians.
Meanwhile, Semen Semenchenko, a lawmaker from the Samopomich party, also claimed the raid on the bureau was politically motivated.
“The existence of the only law enforcement agency the authorities cannot control is a lethal threat for Poroshenko’s entire corrupt system,” Semenchenko wrote in his blog. “Nobody would like it when their friends – prosecutors, state company CEOs etc – are arrested with cars, apartments and pockets full of diamonds. What if tomorrow they come to Poroshenko himself? Now they will do their best to crack down on the bureau, discredit it and destroy physically.”
Kyiv Post staff writer Oleg Sukhov can be reached at [email protected].
