Ukraine's parliament to consider restoring power of anti-graft agencies
By Dan Peleschuk
KYIV (Reuters) -Ukrainian lawmakers on Thursday are expected to consider a bill restoring the independence of the country's two main anti-corruption agencies, aiming to defuse a political crisis that has shaken faith in President Volodymyr Zelenskiy's wartime leadership.
Thousands of protesters rallied in Kyiv and other cities in recent days in a rare show of discontent after lawmakers led by Zelenskiy's ruling party rushed through amendments last week defanging the respected agencies.
Zelenskiy reversed course after the outcry and under pressure from top European officials, who warned Ukraine was jeopardising its bid for EU membership by curbing the powers of its anti-graft authorities.
Demonstrations had continued even after he submitted the new bill restoring their independence, with hundreds rallying near the presidential administration in Kyiv late on Wednesday to chants of "Shame!" and "The people are the power!".
"I really want parliament to vote (for the new measure) just as quickly as it did last time," said protester Kateryna Kononenko, 36, referring to last week's fast-tracked approval of the controversial amendments.
Activists also called for demonstrations near parliament ahead of Thursday's vote in an attempt to pressure lawmakers to approve the new bill.
Eradicating graft and shoring up the rule of law are key requirements for Kyiv to join the EU, which Ukrainians see as critical to their future as they fend off a Russian invasion.
Last week's amendments had given Zelenskiy's hand-picked general prosecutor the power to transfer cases away from the anti-graft agencies and reassign prosecutors - a step critics had said was designed to protect allies from prosecution.
While much smaller, the rallies of the past week have sparked comparisons to Ukraine's 2014 Maidan revolution, when protesters toppled a president they accused of corruption and heavy-handed rule.
More than two-thirds of Ukrainians support the recent protests, according to a recent survey by Ukrainian pollster Gradus Research.
CORRUPTION FIGHTERS
The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) have stepped up a closely watched campaign against graft since Russia's February 2022 invasion.
They have produced charges against lawmakers and senior government officials, including a then-deputy prime minister who was accused last month of taking a $345,000 kickback.
Speaking to Reuters last Friday, after Zelenskiy's reversal, NABU chief Semen Kryvonos said he expected pressure against his agency to continue, fuelled by what he described as corrupt forces uninterested in cleaning up Ukraine.
He added that he and other anti-corruption officials felt a greater sense of responsibility following the protests, but also called on the country's leadership to help their effort.
"This responsibility must be shared with the government, which needs to react and say, 'Okay, there's corruption here - let's destroy it.'"
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Tories demand Reeves ‘urgently rule out' investment tax hikes
The Conservatives are demanding Chancellor Rachel Reeves 'urgently rule out' raising shares taxes in the autumn budget, claiming that leaving investors 'in limbo' will damage the economy. The Tories claim scrapping the £500 dividend allowance will drag an estimated 5.22 million more people into paying investment levies. The party is seeking to pile pressure on ministers after a memo sent by Angela Rayner to Ms Reeves, in which the Deputy Prime Minister suggested a series of tax hikes, was leaked to the press. In the document, Ms Rayner proposed removing the dividend allowance to raise around £325 million a year in revenue, as well as axing inheritance tax relief for AIM shares and increasing dividend tax rates, the Telegraph reported. Shadow chancellor Mel Stride said: 'The Government need to urgently rule out these tax hikes on savers and investors before speculation causes further economic harm. 'Labour don't understand how business works and how to create growth. More taxes on investment, entrepreneurship and saving are the last thing our economy needs right now.' The Government's U-turns over welfare reform and winter fuel payments have left the Chancellor with a multibillion-pound black hole to fill, fuelling speculation that she will seek to raise revenue through tax hikes. The Tories claimed axing the dividend allowance would drag 'an estimated 5.22 million more people into paying dividend tax'. This figure appears to be based on an assumption that at least 8.82 million people in the UK hold shares that pay dividends. Some 3.6 million are already subject to dividend tax, according to data obtained by investment platform AJ Bell through a Freedom of Information request. The Chancellor last year said she would not be 'coming back with more borrowing or more taxes' after her first budget but has since refused to rule out raising specific levies, saying it would be 'irresponsible' to do so. A Labour Party spokesperson said: 'The Conservatives have some brass neck. They've still not apologised for the damage caused by the Liz Truss mini-Budget, nor the £22 billion black hole they left – which hammered firms and families across the country. 'Labour is doing more to support business than the Tories ever could. 'We've already delivered three historic trade deals and four interest rate cuts – to reduce costs and put money back in people's pockets.'
Bloomberg
16 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Russia's Secret War and the Plot to Kill a German CEO
On a clear night at the end of April 2024, arsonists slipped into a tidy residential neighborhood in Hermannsburg, a German village of about 8,000 people surrounded by flat farm fields, heathland nature reserves and military bases. Under the cover of darkness, they arrived at a large redbrick home, where they set fire to a clapboard garden house and a towering beech tree out front. They escaped undetected before the fire brigade arrived. Neighbors awoke the next morning to the smell of still-smoldering wood. The home belonged to Armin Papperger, the chief executive officer of Rheinmetall AG, Germany's largest defense company. Papperger, a stocky, white-haired 62-year-old engineer, wasn't home at the time. In fact, he hadn't been there since 2022, when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, local residents say. The war had made Papperger a busy man: He was turning a sleeping industrial giant into an international defense juggernaut on track to bring in almost €10 billion ($11.6 billion) in revenue that year. Rheinmetall had already provided Ukraine with armored vehicles, military trucks and ammunition, and Papperger had recently announced plans to set up four weapons production sites inside the country.
Wall Street Journal
18 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Notable & Quotable: Politicization at Harvard
Derek Bok of Harvard, in his 1989-90 President's Report, released in April 1991: Perhaps the greatest danger in exerting political pressure of this kind [by divesting university funds from politically disfavored companies] is the risk of sacrificing academic independence. For generations, universities have worked to persuade society that they should be free to shape their own programs and that their professors should be entitled to teach and write is as they think best. This autonomy is essential to the progress of teaching and research. Yet universities can hardly claim the right to be free from external pressure if they insist on launching campaigns to force outside organizations to behave as their students and faculties think best. Sooner or later, governments, corporations and other groups will decide that sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander and begin exerting pressure of their own. When that happens, universities will learn to their dismay that they stand to lose far more than they can gain from trying to joust with the outside world. Student activists often argue that this danger is only hypothetical and that the university should ignore the risk until retaliation actually occurs. By that time, however, it may be too late, and generations of effort to secure autonomy will have been placed in jeopardy.
