NEWS
NEWS

Von der Leyen asks Zelenski for explanations for restricting the independence of Ukraine's anti-corruption authorities

Updated

Brussels emphasizes that they are "very concerned" about the amendments introduced by the Ukrainian president to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office

In Brussels, they do not understand at all the decision of the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenski, to restrict the independence of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO). Both agencies will now be subject to the Attorney General, who is in turn elected by the country's leader, ultimately questioning the Rule of Law. "We are very concerned about the adoption of amendments to the Penal Code in Ukraine. There is a risk that the competencies and powers of Ukraine's anti-corruption institutions will be significantly weakened," explains Guillaume Mercier, spokesperson for the European Commission, to EL MUNDO.

"Both the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) are considered fundamental pillars of the Rule of Law in Ukraine. They are crucial for the country's reform agenda and must operate independently to combat corruption and maintain public trust," he adds.

Mercier further points out that "respect for the Rule of Law and the fight against corruption are fundamental elements of the European Union," and that "as a candidate country, Ukraine is expected to fully uphold these standards." Importantly, he reveals that the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has been in contact with Zelenski. "She expressed her deep concern about the consequences of these amendments and requested explanations," as stated by the Commission.

This adds to the warning issued on Tuesday by the Commissioner for Enlargement, Marta Kos, who also expressed her concerns. In addition to Brussels' clear and deep concerns, those expressed by Berlin and Paris must be added. Benjamin Haddad, French Minister for European Affairs, stated on Wednesday morning that it is still "not too late to reverse course." "We will be closely monitoring this issue," added the French official.

Much harsher in his stance was the German Minister of Foreign Affairs, Johann Wadephul, who was very clear in his social media post: "Restricting the independence of the Ukrainian anti-corruption agency is hindering Ukraine's path to the EU. I hope that Ukraine continues to fight corruption consistently."

Wadephul accompanied his post with a photo after meeting with the heads of NABU and SAPO. As reported by 'Bild', he also contacted his Ukrainian counterpart by phone to convey the same message. In Germany, they consider the alleged Russian influence that Zelenski cited for his intervention in both agencies as a very weak and unbelievable argument, and they even fear that this interference could somehow affect the conflict with Russia.

Central theme at the China-EU summit

The President of Ukraine not only has the European Commission against him but also the two main European capitals. It is evident that his prospects are very complex, and his anticorruption measures come at a time when the EU-China summit is taking place, where the country will be a topic of debate. In fact, it is one of the points of greatest disagreement and will actively contribute to the possible failure of the meeting.

A joint statement is not expected, and the EU has already made it clear to China that it strongly condemns its collaboration with Russia. The Asian country, on the other hand, reportedly signaled to Brussels that it is not willing to accept a defeat of Vladimir Putin. In early July, the Chinese Foreign Minister, Wang Yi, reportedly told the EU's foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, that a scenario in which Ukraine wins the war would allow the United States to focus entirely on the Indo-Pacific region.

According to the South China Morning Post, China preferred a prolonged war to partly distract the attention of the US. This is why, among other reasons, they would be supplying war materials to Russia. The Chinese government maintains that these are not lethal weapons. "We have never provided lethal weapons to any of the parties involved in the conflict and have strictly controlled civilian and military dual-use items," stated Chinese authorities following Ukraine's accusations that China had provided Russia with chemical weapons and military components.