Ukraine’s swift U-Turn: restoring anti-corruption independence amid western pressure

In a rapid and highly scrutinised legislative reversal, Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada adopted Presidential bill №13533 on 31 July, aimed at restoring the independence of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO).

This comes just days after the same legislature had passed a controversial law that brought these bodies under the control of the Prosecutor General, provoking backlash from civil society and reactions from Kyiv’s Western partners.

The president’s corrective bill passed with overwhelming support – 331 MPs voted in favor, with no votes against, and was signed into law by Speaker Ruslan Stefanchuk within minutes of its approval. The swift turnaround followed intense diplomatic engagement, including behind-the-scenes warnings from the EU about potential consequences if parliament failed to reverse the earlier move.

The backlash over Law №124214

The controversy was triggered by Law №124214, adopted on 22 July, which subordinated NABU and SAPO to the Prosecutor General – a change widely seen as undermining the agencies’ independence. The legislation sparked protests in major Ukrainian cities and was sharply criticised by domestic watchdogs and international observers. Despite this, Zelenskyy signed the bill into law, prompting accusations of democratic backsliding and weakening of Ukraine’s anti-corruption architecture.

The European Union responded with uncharacteristic straightfowardness. Diplomatic sources indicated that continued financial and political support for Ukraine, including its path toward EU membership, could be jeopardized unless the independence of anti-corruption bodies was urgently restored.

Ukraine’s wartime protests signal growing dissent against Zelenskyy’s anti-corruption rollback

Faced with mounting pressure, Zelenskyy introduced Bill №13533, which was expedited through the relevant parliamentary committee and brought to a vote without delay. The move was welcomed by Brussels. Speaking to European Pravda, European Commission spokesperson Guillaume Mercier confirmed that the new law “restores key safeguards” for the independence of NABU and SAPO, though he emphasized that this is “not the end of the reform process.”

Mercier further stated that the Commission still needs to review the final text of the law but expects Ukraine to “swiftly fulfill its commitments” to the rule of law. Importantly, he clarified that the EU does not plan to freeze financial assistance to Ukraine following the passage of this bill, softening fears that were stoked after previous warnings.

EU aid and the reform bottleneck

The timing of the legislative correction is significant. Last week, Brussels announced it was reducing a planned disbursement under the Ukraine Facility budget support program from €4.5 billion to €3.05 billion. The reason: Kyiv’s failure to meet several reform benchmarks tied to the conditional financial assistance package.

The shortfall, amounting to €1.4 billion, is technically not lost. Ukraine could still access the funds if it meets the delayed conditions within a 12-month grace period. But the incident marks the first de facto penalty imposed by the EU on Ukraine for unmet reform obligations since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion.

Of the three reform milestones missed, one – the law on the management of frozen assets, has since been adopted. The other two, involving judicial reform and executive territorial reorganisation, remain stalled in the Rada, exposing systemic issues in coordination between the government and legislature.

Reform fatigue and geopolitical risk

The speed and political consensus behind the corrective anti-corruption bill underscore how much is at stake for Ukraine’s EU trajectory. However, the broader picture is less reassuring. Monitoring by the RRR4U civil society consortium suggests Ukraine is slipping into a spiral of reform delays and non-compliance.

Critics argue that the government failed to adequately engage with parliament to explain the stakes involved, raising concerns about reform fatigue and legislative inertia at a time when Western confidence is critical for Ukraine’s survival and recovery.

The controversy has also reignited debate about the role of Ukraine’s Western partners. Commentators have urged the EU and others to adopt a firmer stance, warning that silence or complacency could embolden illiberal trends and erode public trust.

The episode should at least serve as a reminder that progress toward the EU is not just about symbolic gestures or high-level summits – it is grounded in hard legislative work, public accountability, and a consistent commitment to institutional integrity.

Caption: A handout picture made available by Ukraine’s Presidential Press Service shows Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (C) addressing lawmakers in the Verkhovna Rada, the Ukrainian parliament, Kyiv, Ukraine, 16 October 2024 amid the Russian invasion. EPA/UKRAINE PRESIDENTIAL PRESS SERVICE HANDOUT