Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
The National Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office presented a report for the first half of 2026. Behind the façade of the reported figures — 55 guilty verdicts, among the convicted four high-ranking officials, judges, and prosecutors — the briefing raised more questions about the effectiveness of the agencies themselves than it answered.
The main admission came from the head of the SAP himself. According to Oleksandr Klymenko, the problems the agencies remind people of “every six months” have not been resolved for years, and this indicates that corruption in Ukraine is not decreasing: it remains at the same level, and top-level corruption is even increasing. The statement is telling: the anti-corruption vertical has existed for a decade, its budgets and staff have grown, yet by the leadership’s own assessment there is no systemic result for the country. Responsibility for this is traditionally addressed by NABU and SAP to the “lack of political will of the state” — questions about their own effectiveness were not raised at the briefing.
High-profile cases are stuck. The criminal proceeding against former Deputy Prosecutor General Dmytro Verbytsky has been ongoing for three years — and during that time no one has been charged. The leadership’s response was that “the stage of gathering evidence” is underway, and the proceeding could also end in closure. There is no progress in the Lazarenko case, on which Ukraine has for decades pinned hopes of recovering significant funds from the United States — Klymenko admitted that the parties are “at the same point,” despite another trip by the prosecutor general to Washington.
The “Midas” case: a year of investigation — and no victim. In the high-profile proceeding, where, according to the investigation, more than 100 million were laundered through Energoatom, the company itself still does not have victim status. When directly asked about comparing these losses with the company’s record profit, the agency responded that they are “incomparable indicators,” avoiding further details by citing the secrecy of the investigation.
Acquittals — more than the national average. This was acknowledged directly at the briefing. Two explanations were offered: changes in the law and in Supreme Court practice, which lead to evidence being deemed inadmissible, and that some acquittals in the High Anti-Corruption Court concern cases brought by other agencies — notably the National Police. Errors by the agencies’ own detectives and prosecutors were mentioned only as a theoretical possibility.
Timing of the suspicion against Stefanishyna. Journalists asked twice why the suspicion against the former deputy prime minister was handed over only after her dismissal from the ambassador post. The answer was purely procedural: a suspicion is handed over “when sufficient materials have been collected.” At the same time, in court the prosecutor appealed to her possible influence on selection commissions for appointing heads of agencies — but, as it turned out, that influence is not the subject of the investigation: the argument was used to justify a preventive measure without being verified within the case.
Tone of the conversation with critics. Uncomfortable questions at the briefing were accompanied by characteristic rhetoric: the agencies’ leadership called critics participants in “dirty information campaigns,” referring to “Telegram cesspools” and certain members of parliament. The question about a plea deal in the “Mindichgate” case went unanswered, the number of proceedings regarding illegal enrichment of MPs was not named, and the formula “we do not talk about everything and we do not publish everything” came from an agency that demands transparency from everyone else.
Much of the briefing was devoted by the leaders to the conflict with the SBU — wiretapping, surveillance, pressure on judges — and to a list of legislative changes they expect from parliament. The question of what NABU and SAP themselves could do differently so that corruption, by their own estimate, would finally begin to decrease was not raised at the briefing.
Document: PDF proof of the original version of the news item "Гучні справи роками без підозр, топкорупція зростає: що показав звіт НАБУ і САП". It records the publication content at the moment of the first scan, the preservation date and the source: HAB Media.
