"After us – the law": why the High Anti-Corruption Court has become a servant of NABU and SAPO
In recent months, scandals surrounding Ukraine’s High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) have sharply increased. What were once isolated incidents – such as family members influencing judges' decisions – have now become regular occurrences. Today, there is hardly a week passes without negative media coverage. Among the main controversies are the busts of high-profile cases involving corrupt officials, who then flee abroad; the luxurious lifestyles of the High Anti-Corruption Court judges amid wartime hardships; and the court acting as an extension of the NABU and SAPO, resembling practices of the Soviet judicial system. The apex of these developments is the noticeable decline in the intellectual standards of the High Anti-Corruption Court and its candidates. The recent failure of judicial candidates in IQ tests shocked even the court's public defenders. All of this is casting a dark shadow over this institution.
Is the High Anti-Corruption Court of Ukraine, once seen as a model of Ukrainian justice, turning into a typical district court, potentially sealing the fate of the entire judicial system?
The High Anti-Corruption Court of Ukraine is a very young institution, having been established in 2018 with the backing of civil society and under the oversight of international partners. There were high hopes for the court, particularly as a means of addressing the inefficiencies of ordinary courts in handling corruption cases at the highest levels.
Nostalgia for the "Soviet Era," or why the High Anti-Corruption Court began to serve NABU and SAPO
However, these hopes have now been met with disillusionment, especially with accusations from Ukrainian lawyers that the High Anti-Corruption Court is following Soviet-style justice. Lawyer Taras Baranov, during a High Council of Justice hearing on complaints against the court, stated that the court had adopted a post-totalitarian approach – actively siding with NABU detectives and SAPO prosecutors.
"The judges of the High Anti-Corruption Court are essentially taking on the role of the prosecution – collaborating with SAPO prosecutors and NABU detectives. This mirrors the post-Soviet, post-totalitarian mindset where courts are seen as extensions of the prosecution," Baranov emphasized.
Gizo Uglava, the former first deputy head of NABU, acknowledged this bias toward the prosecution: "We worked (with the HACC) as one unit. Of course, for this, we were subjected to harsh criticism, and we were accused of an unprecedented concentration of power." In essence, the former NABU leadership openly admitted to influencing the court with little regard for due process.
The European Commission has also drawn attention to the High Anti-Corruption Court's post-totalitarian tendencies, highlighting concerns over systematic violations of constitutional rights, particularly the presumption of innocence. The issue has now gained international attention, becoming more than just an internal Ukrainian matter.
Human rights activist Yevhen Zakharov commented on the European Commission’s shadow report, pointing out that anti-corruption bodies are leaking sensitive information, particularly from secret investigations, to activists under their control. The High Anti-Corruption Court is increasingly playing along with NABU and SAPO, distorting the foundations of justice. "The court must be completely independent from anti-corruption agencies. Any court must be independent from investigative institutions. Otherwise, it is no longer a court", – he emphasized.
Ukrainian lawyer Rostyslav Kravets also raised concerns about human rights violations, pointing to the court’s failure to respect the constitutional ban on double jeopardy and the accused's right to be informed of the charges against them. "For me personally, this is not something that reminds me of, it directly repeats the year 1937, when people didn’t know what they were being accused of or on what basis."
But why has this happened? The answer, it seems, lies in financial incentives. Over the past few years, judges of the High Anti-Corruption Court have accumulated significant wealth. For "favorable" decisions, the penal system has turned a blind eye to their newly acquired luxury apartments, cars, and other assets. But where does this money come from? The next section explains.
Corruption within the Court: "Treatment" and Release
Against the backdrop of accusations that the court is serving NABU and SAPO, its increasingly controversial decisions – especially in high-profile cases – have become a major source of public discontent. For example, in early November, the High Anti-Corruption Court released from custody former People’s Deputy Dmytro Kryuchkov, who is suspected of embezzling UAH 1.5 billion.
In a similar case, the court released Kostyantyn Logvinenko, the former Acting General Director of KharkivOblenergo, on a UAH 3.5 million bail, despite allegations that he co-organized the theft of UAH 12.5 million from the company and attempted to steal another UAH 120 million.
Meanwhile, a judge of the Appellate Chamber calculated the income of a single mother over 21 years – including maternity and student scholarships – and set her bail at UAH 805,200.
These dubious and inconsistent decisions, especially in cases involving NABU and SAPO, are causing irreparable harm to the state. Increasingly, “victims” of these judicial rulings are turning to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and winning large sums in compensation from Ukraine. In recent weeks, a human rights activist successfully sued the state for €15,000. On average, Ukraine is paying between €100,000 and €200,000 each month in ECHR rulings. Last year alone, the country paid out over €2 million. And now, with the growing number of such cases, the amount of these payments is only set to increase. All this is money that could have gone to support the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
A representative of the High Anti-Corruption Court bent... the High Anti-Corruption Court and the state for 500,000 UAH
The paradox is that the High Anti-Corruption Court, which is supposed to protect state funds from encroachments, is causing increasing damage to the state budget. And not just indirectly – through the European Court of Human Rights' decisions, but also directly. Recently, the media published information that High Anti-Corruption Court judge Kateryna Sikora, with the help of colleagues in another court, "squeezed" half a million hryvnias from the state. She ruled that the Cabinet of Ministers had illegally limited the high salaries of top officials and judges during the coronavirus pandemic in 2020.
According to lawyers, Judge Sikora set a dangerous precedent: now thousands of officials and judges will pocket the "under-earned" millions of hryvnias from COVID-19. These funds will be taken from the budget of a warring country. And the money will not go towards buying drones for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, but into the pockets of officials and judges.
It is notable that the very author of this precedent, Judge Sikora, is accused by the NACP of... illegal enrichment. And she is not the only one in the High Anti-Corruption Court with questions regarding an inappropriate luxurious lifestyle. In fact, it’s about this...
"I am a judge, I want to live for myself"
The number of reports of luxury purchases by judges of the High Anti-Corruption Court has surged in recent years. NABU has identified signs of illicit enrichment in some judges, including Kateryna Sikora. She was caught falsifying information about several cars, apartments, and parking spaces she acquired while serving as a judge.
In addition to Sikora, another judge, Valeria Chorna, sparked controversy when, in September 2022, she purchased a BMW X6 from a dealership amid the war. When questioned about this, she defended her decision, saying, "There must be some personal satisfaction. I believe I deserve it and have the right to this car".
Mykola Glotov, a judge in the Appellate Chamber, was seen in tears after his disqualification from a hearing. However, that did not stop him from purchasing a Tesla worth nearly UAH 2 million a year after the full-scale invasion began. His tears did not prevent him from setting an unreasonably high bail of UAH 805,000 for a single mother. Judge Markiyan Halabala illegally received official housing and failed to disclose several details in his declaration. Meanwhile, Vitaliy Kryklyvyi has been spotted in housing fraud schemes with the help of his wife, who, not surprisingly, is also a judge of the High Anti-Corruption Court.
The Degradation of the Court: IQ Tests and the Deterioration of Standards
A major question arises: Why has this happened, and what does the future hold for the High Anti-Corruption Court?
The reasons are obvious. According to experts, NABU and SAPO turn a blind eye to the judges' inappropriate expenses while the High Anti-Corruption Court churns out cases at their request. As a result, the High Anti-Corruption Court is becoming increasingly dependent on detectives and prosecutors in exchange for a luxurious life. Meanwhile, in such conditions, judges begin to degrade. As a consequence, their requirements are lowered.
The initiative to exempt candidates for positions as judges of the High Anti-Corruption Court from passing IQ tests and the exam on the history of Ukraine further confirms this. The relevant committee of the Verkhovna Rada has recommended adoption in the second reading draft law No. 11425-d, which removes the requirement of a 75% passing score for cognitive testing (IQ test). The competition for the High Anti-Corruption Court will no longer include testing on the history of Ukrainian statehood.
What does this mean in practice? The Supreme Judicial Council will determine the IQ test content, and given the current state of the court’s judges – luxury cars, questionable decisions, and collaboration with NABU and SAPO – it’s likely that either no test will be given or it will be greatly simplified, potentially reducing it to trivial exercises like number puzzles.
In the end, the IQ test scandals were not long in coming. Some specialized publications have already called it a "disaster". According to the cognitive abilities (IQ) test results, out of 74 candidates for 15 positions as judges of the High Anti-Corruption Court, only 25 (33.8%) candidates, or about a third, scored a passing grade. Out of 49 candidates for ten vacant positions as judges in the Appeals Chamber of the High Anti-Corruption Court, only 19 candidates (38.7%) passed.
The cherry on the cake – four judges of the High Anti-Corruption Court (Nataliya Movchan, Oksana Oliynyk, Lesya Fedorak, and Vitaliy Kryklyvyi) failed the cognitive abilities test during the competition for the Appeals Chamber of the same court. Interestingly, Vitaliy Kryklyvyi's wife passed the test successfully.
What’s Next?
A famous quote attributed to Ukraine’s second president, Leonid Kuchma, states: "No matter what kind of party was under construction, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union always comes out." In this case, no matter what court is created, the legacy of the "Soviet People's Court" persists. These developments have unfolded in a body that was created relatively recently with the support of civil society and international partners. While the situation with other courts is even worse, the High Anti-Corruption Court is clearly following the same downward path. In this context, it is hardly surprising that trust in Ukraine’s judicial system is at an all-time low, with 72% of Ukrainians expressing a lack of confidence. If current trends continue, this figure could rise to 100%.
Experts mention Poland in connection with anti-corruption authorities' violations of the law. There, the new coalition that won last year's elections included the liquidation of the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau in its agreement.
Some experts have compared Poland, where the new government promised to dismantle the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau. In our reality, we may be talking about dismantling the entire anti-corruption triangle – NABU, SAPO, and the High Anti-Corruption Court – as, at the very least, ineffective. And, in reality, harmful.
The blog reflects the author's personal point of view. The editorial board is not responsible for the content or accuracy of the materials in this section.