Kyiv to Name Controversial Candidate for Economic Crimes Bureau Amid Pressure

Ukraine Faces Pressure to Appoint Economic Crimes Bureau Director

Ukraine is under increasing pressure to appoint a new director for the Bureau of Economic Security, following recent controversies that have sparked domestic and international backlash. The government’s refusal to approve a nominee for the position has raised concerns about its commitment to anti-corruption reforms and its adherence to international agreements.

Earlier this month, Ukraine's Cabinet of Ministers rejected an independent commission's nominee to lead the Bureau of Economic Security, citing alleged ties to Russia. This decision was widely criticized as being unlawful and politically motivated. However, the situation escalated further when a law was passed last week that significantly increased the Prosecutor General’s control over two key anti-corruption agencies: the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor (SAPO). The move triggered widespread condemnation from both local and global observers.

The European Commission has urged Ukraine to swiftly appoint the nominated director, emphasizing that the appointment is essential for the bureau's reform and to ensure its independent and effective functioning. This requirement is part of Ukraine’s broader commitment to reform under the EU accession process. Additionally, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has set a deadline for the selection of a new head of the bureau by the end of the month as part of a $15 billion loan program.

Roman Washchuk, Ukraine’s business ombudsman, expressed concerns that the government’s recent actions could undermine confidence in its reform efforts. He noted that while the IMF has been understanding, the kind of moves seen last week could leave lasting negative impressions. “Things that would have been glossed over may now be taken into account,” he said.

Oleksandr Tsyvinsky, an experienced anti-corruption official with over 20 years in law enforcement, was appointed to the vacant position by a selection committee composed of three international members and three government representatives. However, the government overruled this decision, citing security concerns related to Tsyvinsky’s father’s Russian citizenship. Despite his extensive experience, including nearly a decade at NABU, and his clearance for state secrets, the government refused to proceed with his appointment.

Ukrainian lawmakers and civil society groups have called for Tsyvinsky’s appointment, arguing that the government was legally obligated to act within 10 days of his nomination. Prime Minister Yuliia Svyrydenko defended the decision, stating that the government has the right to reject candidates based on security reasons. However, critics argue that the real motivation behind the rejection is the government’s reluctance to deal with an independent figure who might investigate high-profile cases.

Olena Trehub, head of the NGO the Independent Anti-Corruption Commission (NAKO), suggested that the government’s opposition to Tsyvinsky is rooted in fear of scrutiny. She pointed out that the same pretext used to weaken NABU and SAPO — concerns about Russian infiltration — is now being applied to block Tsyvinsky.

According to opposition lawmaker Yaroslav Zhelezniak, President Volodymyr Zelensky played a role in blocking Tsyvinsky’s appointment due to concerns that his circle could face prosecution. Analysts believe that the government’s attempts to weaken NABU are linked to its investigations into members of Zelensky’s inner circle.

The bureau, established in 2021 to tackle white-collar crimes, has faced allegations of inefficiency and misconduct. Its bylaws require a six-member selection committee, with international experts holding final decision-making authority. James Wasserstrom, an international committee member, has stood by his decision to nominate Tsyvinsky, expressing confidence that he has a strong chance of being appointed.

It remains unclear what the government will decide. Prime Minister Svyrydenko has not reversed her stance on rejecting Tsyvinsky’s nomination. Olena Trehub is concerned that this could signal a commitment to another selection process, which may not be supported by international partners if the outcome is likely to be overturned again.

Washchuk highlighted the challenges of repeating the process, noting that the previous selection was funded by USAID, which has since been reduced under U.S. leadership. “You would have to be a pretty masochistic international to want to go through this again,” he said.

Despite these uncertainties, Zhelezniak believes the government has no choice but to appoint Tsyvinsky. “They have to do it,” he said.