The history of the competition for the new head of the CAP is frankly shameful and does not bring Ukraine closer to the EU standards in which we aspire to membership.
The fact that the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office does not have real autonomy has a negative impact on the investigation of corruption crimes, said NABU ex-director Artem Sytnyk. He considers it strategically correct to endow the so-called the head of the SAP with such powers that the anti-prosecutor's office becomes autonomous.
“The history of relations with the SAP has developed dynamically. There were different periods in it. But we have results. And these are the results of joint work. The fact that the SAP does not have real autonomy has a negative effect on the situation with the investigation of corruption crimes committed by high-ranking officials. The history of the competition for the new head of the SAP is frankly shameful and, apparently, does not bring Ukraine closer to the EU standards, membership in which we aspire, “- said Sytnyk.
According to him, it is really a problem when the acting head of the SAP can not appoint even a prosecutor in a case. All these issues are now being resolved by the Attorney General.
“It really was a problem, but I can say that for the last six months I can't complain about the problems in my relationship with Iryna Venediktova. At the same time, I consider it strategically correct to endow the acting the head of the SAP with such powers to fully ensure the autonomy of the anti-corruption prosecutor's office, “Sytnyk added.
Read also: NABU told how together with SAP work in conditions of war
We will remind, on December 24 the commission on election of the head of SAP failed to approve contest results again. In fact, the commission refuses to confirm the candidates' own scores given during the interviews.
Tatarov's corruption, so his candidacy to head the SAP does not suit Bankova.
On the eve of the final stage of the competition decision to cancel the procedure of the tender commission . Judge Oleksiy Ogurtsov referred to the non-existent norm of the law, and was guided by only one version of the law from 2015, ignoring the changes.
The next day, some members of the commission suggested postponing the hearing to “review the court's decision” and suggested postponing the approval of the results so that the decision could be postponed. did not appeal in court. “
