Like many of the other activists fighting corruption in Ukraine’s highest branches of power, Alexandra Ustinova, a member of the Kyiv-based Anti-Corruption Action Center, has already collected all the documents she needs to submit an electronic declaration of her assets.
Despite international condemnation and calls to cancel the requirement for the public disclosure of the assets of anti-graft activists, which the Ukrainian parliament imposed in 2017, lawmakers seem in no rush to cancel the legislation.
Meanwhile, the deadline for the first declarations is April 1.
By that day, every Ukrainian involved in anti-corruption activities in a non-profit has to file a highly-detailed online disclosure form of assets and income in 2017 for themselves and their immediate family – the same form as required from public officials.
The demand has been widely criticized as unfair and as an attempt to put pressure on anti-graft activists, who are behind some of the breakthrough reforms of recent years – including the introduction of the electronic declarations for public servants.
Parliament has until March 23 – its last day in session this month – to cancel the controversial measure or postpone its implementation.
A bill to push back the deadline until July 1 was filed by a member of the Bloc of Petro Poroshenko faction, the biggest faction with 135 seats in parliament, on March 21. As of later that day, the bill was at the preparatory stage, being reviewed by the parliament’s committees.
If the demand isn’t lifted or postponed, activists are expecting a surge of scandals and attempts to discredit them to start after they disclose their assets.
In the past, several notable activists came under fire purchasing real estate or even for vacationing abroad.
Ustinova herself came under such an attack in May 2017, when pro-government video-bloggers approached her in a Kyiv airport as she was returning from vacation in Sri Lanka. They demanded to know how she could afford the vacation and made harsh references to Russia’s war in eastern Ukraine, saying that it was immoral of her to go on holiday at such a time. She burst into tears.
Having come through that, Ustinova doesn’t believe that the parliament will cancel the demand to file declarations before the deadline.
President’s solution
After criticism from the West, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko promised to cancel the e-declaration requirements for activists, and in July submitted a bill to the Verkhovna Rada to replace the measure with a requirement that their organizations publish financial reports.
However, the Verkhovna Rada, where pro-Poroshenko forces command a majority, has never considered the president’s alternative bill.
But even if it does, it may not be enough.
Poroshenko’s amendments set severe penalties, including the stripping of NGOs of non-profit status and imposing fines, as well as violating international law and the law on the privacy of personal data, the groups argued.
And while the Presidential Administration portrayed the suggested rules as a sign of goodwill towards civil society and claimed they were in line with Western standards, they were in fact criticized by a number of international and domestic watchdogs.
The European Commission for Democracy Through Law, better known as the Venice Commission, said March 16 that the changes offered by Poroshenko would conflict with human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of association, the right of respect for private life and the prohibition of discrimination.
Instead, the commission recommended that the controversial bill be completely revised.
On March 19, the G7 Ambassadors’ Support Group supported the Venice Commission’s conclusion.
E-declaration requirements for anti-corruption activists are not consistent with Ukraine’s international obligations and best practices, negatively affect international assistance, and obstruct the fight against corruption, the G7 ambassadors concluded.
