NABU and SAPO reported for the first half of the year: Corruption is not decreasing, while top-level corruption is growing

NABU and SAPO reported for the first half of the year: Corruption is not decreasing, while top-level corruption is growing

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office presented a report for the first half of 2026. Behind the facade of the reported figures — 55 convictions, including four senior officials, judges, and prosecutors among those convicted — the briefing raised more questions about the effectiveness of the agencies themselves than it answered.

The main admission came from the head of the SAPO himself. According to Oleksandr Klymenko, the problems that the agencies have been pointing out “every six months” have remained unresolved for years, indicating that corruption in Ukraine is not decreasing: it remains at the same level, while high-level corruption is even growing. The statement is telling: the anti-corruption vertical has existed for a decade, its budgets and staff have grown, yet according to its own leadership, there has been no systemic result for the country. Responsibility for this is traditionally placed by NABU and SAPO on the “lack of political will of the state” — the question of their own effectiveness was not raised at the briefing.

High-profile cases are stalling. The criminal proceeding against former Deputy Prosecutor General Dmytro Verbytskyi has been ongoing for three years — and during this time no one has been served with a notice of suspicion. The leadership’s response boiled down to the claim that “the stage of evidence collection is underway,” and that the case could even end in closure. In the Lazarenko case, which Ukraine has for decades linked to hopes of recovering significant funds from the United States, there has been no progress — Klymenko acknowledged that the parties “remain at the same point,” despite another trip by the Prosecutor General to Washington.

The “Midas” case: a year of investigation — and still no victim. In the high-profile proceeding in which, according to investigators, over 100 million was laundered through Energoatom, the company itself has still not been granted victim status. When directly asked about comparing these losses with the company’s record profit, the agency replied that these were “incomparable indicators” and avoided 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 legislation and Supreme Court practice, which render evidence inadmissible, and the fact that some acquittals at the HACC relate to cases handled by other agencies, in particular the National Police. Errors by their own detectives and prosecutors appeared in the list of reasons only as a theoretical possibility.

Timing of the suspicion against Stefanishyna. Journalists twice asked why the former Deputy Prime Minister was served with a notice of suspicion only after her dismissal from the post of ambassador. The response was purely procedural: a notice of suspicion is served “when sufficient materials have been collected.” At the same time, in court the prosecutor referred to her possible influence over competition commissions for selecting heads of agencies — yet, as it turned out, this influence is not the subject of the investigation: the argument was used to justify a preventive measure without being examined within the framework of the case.

Tone of conversation with critics. Uncomfortable questions at the briefing were accompanied by characteristic rhetoric: the agencies’ leadership labeled critics as participants in “dirty information campaigns,” mentioning “Telegram cesspools” and certain members of parliament. The question about a plea deal in the “Mindichgate” case remained unanswered, the number of proceedings concerning illegal enrichment of MPs was not disclosed, and the formula “we do not talk about everything and do not publish everything” was voiced by an agency that demands transparency from everyone else.

A significant part of the briefing was devoted by the leadership to the conflict with the SSU — wiretapping, surveillance, pressure on judges — and to a list of legislative changes they expect from parliament. The question of what NABU and SAPO themselves could do differently so that corruption, by their own assessment, would finally begin to decrease, was never raised at the briefing.