Disinfo: Ukraine’s anti-corruption bureau is an element of external control over Ukraine’s politicians

Summary

NABU [National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine] began to perform the functions for which this “anti-corruption system” was created. It is a club against any Ukrainian politician, official, or businessman who dares to be arbitrary (i.e. go beyond the limits set by the system of external control).

Disproof

This is an example of a recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative alleging that Ukraine is under external control.

NABU is a state law enforcement agency that independently investigates the corruption of public officials and prepares cases for prosecution. The bureau was created in 2014 after the National Anti-Corruption Committee did not fulfil its obligations. NABU is accountable to the Parliament of Ukraine through the law on the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine and the law on prevention of corruption.

Read similar disinformation cases alleging that US ordered Ukrainian Minister of Health to discredit Sputnik V, that since Euromaidan, the West dictates political appointments in Ukraine, that IMF destroys Ukrainian economy and brings Ukraine under external control, that Ukraine is a colony of the IMF and George Soros, or that Soros will soon gain control of Ukraine.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 225
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 14/12/2020
  • Language/target audience: Russian
  • Country: EU, Ukraine, US
  • Keywords: Corruption, Ukrainian statehood, George Soros

Disclaimer

Cases in the EUvsDisinfo database focus on messages in the international information space that are identified as providing a partial, distorted, or false depiction of reality and spread key pro-Kremlin messages. This does not necessarily imply, however, that a given outlet is linked to the Kremlin or editorially pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position, as the information and opinions expressed are based on media reporting and analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force.

see more

International Criminal Court demonises Russia in the Ukrainian conflict

The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court is trying not only to make Russia a participant in the conflict but also to impose on Russia the duties of an “occupying power” both in relation to Crimea (she directly writes: “Russia’s annexation of Crimea”) and in relation to the eastern regions of Ukraine.

The prosecutor fulfils an order for the legal demonisation of Russia in the Ukrainian conflict. And she does it legally so rudely that there is no doubt about the unscrupulous nature of her actions.

The individuals who committed a coup d’etat in the country and used violence against a part of their own population are regarded in The Hague as legitimate authority!

Disproof

This is an example of recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation on Ukraine and, in particular, the examination by the International Criminal Court of the crimes committed in Ukraine during the 2013-2014 protests in Crimea and Donbas.

The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) did not demonise Russia. The Prosecutor did not call Russia an occupying power in Crimea or Donbas. In the statement, the Prosecutor mentioned that in order to establish the truth, the ICC is going to cooperate with the authorities of Ukraine and Russia equally.

The West tacitly admits that Crimea belongs to Russia, as proven by firms operating there

Western firms are slowly entering Crimea, and sanctions are no obstacle. The situation of Austrian architects Coop Himmelblau, which took part in the construction of the Sevastopol Opera, only showed that the West has adopted for a long time the tacit consent that Crimea belongs to Russia after the peninsula was reunited with the country in 2014 amidst a coup in Kyiv and following a referendum. Western countries, along with Ukraine, don’t recognise Crimea as Russian, but this can’t be said of the business community.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the 2013-14 protests in Ukraine and the illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia.

Contrary to the claim, international sanctions over Crimea are a serious obstacle for Western firms to operate on the peninsula. Those companies who continue doing it are forced to resort to complicated evasive schemes and face consequences of violating EU legislation.

Lithuanian judges broke the law in the case of January 13th

The Investigative Committee of Russia (ICR) charged, in absentia, the Lithuanian judges which passed an illegal judgement in the case of events of January 13, 1991, in Vilnius. The ICR said that the Lithuanian judges know that events in Vilnius happened at the moment when Lithuania was part of the USSR. During the events of January 1991, Soviet troops acted according to Soviet law to ensure public order.

<…>

On January 13., 1991, during an armed confrontation near the TV tower in Vilnius, 14 people died and more than 600 were injured. The Prosecutor General’s Office of Lithuania claims without any evidence that victims were killed by Soviet soldiers.

Disproof

The case contains historical revisionism and recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the events of January 13th, 1991.

The statement by the Investigative Committee of Russia against the Lithuanian judges is an attempt to exert pressure on Lithuania, its courts, and law enforcement officials.