STATE BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION OF UKRAINE AS AN ANTI-CORRUPTION ENTITY

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to clarify the legal nature and features of the status of the State Bureau of Investigation as a subject of combating corruption, to determine its place among other subjects of anti-corruption activity and to develop proposals for improving the relevant legal regulation. The article examines the legal status of the State Bureau of Investigation as an independent subject of combating corruption in the system of state authorities of Ukraine. The features that define the State Bureau of Investigation as a specific subject of anti-corruption activity are analyzed, in particular, the special subject and subject composition of the investigation, the combination of criminal procedural and operational-search powers, as well as the right to initiate civil law mechanisms for depriving a person of illegally acquired property. The place of the State Bureau of Investigation among other subjects of combating corruption – the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption – is revealed, and the criteria for delimiting their competence are clarified. Based on the analysis of annual reports for 2018, 2023 and 2024, the practical implementation of the State Bureau of Investigation’s status as an anti-corruption subject was investigated, specific examples of the exercise of powers to recover unfounded assets and transfer seized property to the defense forces were given. It was concluded that the defining feature of the status of the State Bureau of Investigation as an anti-corruption subject is a specific subjective criterion for delimiting its competence, which is based not on the nature of the committed act, but on the special legal status of the person who committed it. It has been established that the very fact that crimes committed by judges, law enforcement officers, officials holding particularly responsible positions, and military personnel are subject to the jurisdiction of the State Bureau of Investigation is the systemic factor that gives grounds to consider this body as an independent subject of combating corruption, and not simply as a body of pre-trial investigation with an accompanying anti-corruption function. This feature, in the author’s opinion, has a deep constitutional and legal justification, since it is designed to ensure the implementation of the principle of impartiality of criminal proceedings against persons who themselves perform state authority functions or law enforcement activities, making it impossible for a situation in which the investigation of corrupt acts of law enforcement officers would be carried out by their own colleagues or management within the same departmental system.