Between Kyiv and Brussels: How the Departmental Initiatives of NABU and SAP Turned into 'European Demands'
At the end of 2025, the political and legal landscape of Ukraine was shaken by a joint statement from European Commissioner Marta Kos and Deputy Prime Minister Taras Kachka. However, around the document, informally called the "Kachka-Kos plan" and containing 10 points of anti-corruption and judicial reforms, an unprecedentedly audacious political manipulation is unfolding. The authorities and anti-corruption bodies are trying to convince society and parliament that we are facing strict demands from the European Union, the failure to meet which will hinder European integration.
However, a detailed analysis of events and the chronology of correspondence between agencies indicate otherwise. The European demands turned out to be skillfully presented wishes of the anti-corruption bodies. Instead of an objective requirement from Brussels, we observe an attempt by NABU and SAP to legalize their own corporate interests through Ukraine's international obligations.
Chronology of ideas: from Kyiv to Brussels
The analysis of events allows us to record a clear sequence between the initiatives of Ukrainian anti-corruption bodies and their subsequent reflection in the positions of international partners:
— November 20, 2025: the leadership of NABU and SAP sends proposals to the government regarding the elimination of "procedural obstacles" in the investigation of corruption cases.
— December 11, 2025: a joint statement by government representatives and European institutions is published, containing provisions substantively identical to the proposals of the anti-corruption agencies.
This chronology indicates the presence of effective communication channels through which certain internal interests of the bodies were integrated into the international dialogue. The risk of such practice is obvious: institutional aspirations to expand their own powers receive the EU benchmark label, complicating further discussion in the Verkhovna Rada.
Key directions of the reform: what is hidden behind the signboard?
The proposals that moved from departmental correspondence to the reform plan concern four main changes:
Own expert institution: Creation of a structure exclusively for NABU cases. Justification — "workload" and "conflict of interest" in existing state institutions.
Procedural autonomy of the prosecutor: Exclusion of judicial control over the extension of pre-trial investigation terms up to 12 months — the right is transferred exclusively to the prosecutor.
Change in rules for case closure: Exclusion of paragraph 10 of part 1 of article 284 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, which will make it impossible to close proceedings after notification of suspicion due to expiration of terms.
Expansion of SAP powers: Granting the head of SAP the right to independently enter information about crimes committed by MPs into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations (currently this is the competence of the Prosecutor General), formation of investigative groups, and direct cooperation with foreign bodies without the mediation of the Prosecutor General's Office.
As we can see, under the banner of EU demands, the Verkhovna Rada is effectively being asked to vote for the long-awaited strengthening of the powers of NABU and SAP. Although these reforms are presented as external ultimatums, they are the result of internal lobbying, skillfully adapted to the requirements of European integration. Thus, instead of a discussion about the quality of justice, parliament faces a choice: to support the expansion of departmental influence or be accused of sabotaging the EU course.
Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp, our page on Facebook and on Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.
