A court decision against the mayor of Starokostiantyniv, a finding of guilt of a public official in actions involving a conflict of interest, and a number of orders, in particular to the acting mayor of Poltava, are the results of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention's (NACP) activities in the field of legislation on preventing and resolving conflicts of interest in December 2024.
Thus, NACP drew up a report on an administrative offense under Art. 172-4 of the Code of Administrative Offenses “Violation of restrictions on combining work and combining with other activities”, committed by an investigator of the Department for Investigation of Crimes in the Field of Economic and Official Activities of one of the departments of the Main Directorate of the National Police in Kyiv. From May to December 2023, he held the position of director of a limited liability company with a profit motive. By his actions, the official violated the restriction established by the requirements of Art. 25 of the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption”.
Several court decisions were made based on the results of the review of administrative offense reports drawn up by NACP.
The court found the mayor of Starokostiantyniv guilty of committing administrative offenses related to corruption under Art. 172-7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses “Violation of requirements for preventing and resolving conflicts of interest.” Before the marriage, the official made a decision on bonuses for his fiancée, with whom he had already had an off-duty relationship, in the context of a real conflict. The mayor received an administrative penalty in the form of a fine.
In December 2024, the Kyiv Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of a member of the Ukrainian Parliament against the decision of the Pechersk District Court of Kyiv, which, after reviewing the protocol drawn up by the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption, found the official guilty of committing an administrative offense under Part 2 of Article 172-7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses “Violation of requirements for the prevention and settlement of conflicts of interest”.
In addition, based on the results of consideration of the protocol drawn up by the Agency, the District Court of Zhytomyr brought to administrative responsibility the head of one of the departments of the Main Department of the State Tax Service in Zhytomyr region for committing administrative offenses under Art. 172-7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses “Violation of Requirements for Prevention and Settlement of Conflicts of Interest”. The official failed to report the existence of a real conflict of interest that arose in connection with a thematic inspection of the Department of Personal Taxation of the Main State Tax Service, whose employee is related to her in an off-duty relationship. An administrative penalty in the form of a fine was imposed on the offender.
In December, NACP issued several notices of violation of the legislation on ethical behavior, prevention and settlement of conflicts of interest.
In particular, the head of the State Labor Service of Ukraine was issued an order to eliminate violations of Article 53-1 of the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption” regarding the consideration of corruption reports. It was found that the agency failed to ensure timely processing of corruption reports submitted through the Unified Whistleblower Reporting Portal. As a result, several corruption reports were left without consideration.
The acting mayor of Poltava also received an order to conduct an internal investigation to identify the causes and conditions that led to the commission of a corruption-related offense by the head of the Education Department of the City Council. In addition, the official should consider bringing the offender to justice.
Thus, NACP found that the Director of the Department of Education of Poltava City Council was informed about the existence of a conflict of interest in the activities of her subordinate. However, the official did not take measures to prevent and properly resolve the conflict of interest of her subordinate, which violated the provisions of Part 4 of Article 28 of the Law and thus committed a corruption-related offense.
