Kyiv did not keep its promises to set up a lustration committee and an anti-corruption bureau

Exactly four months ago, on February 27, the Verkhovna Rada appointed Arseniy Yatsenyuk’s government, which was formed based on the coalition principle by the oppositional factions and representatives of the protesters. But over the period that followed many representatives of the Maidan did not obtain their promised offices.

Pro bono publico

On the eve of appointment of the Cabinet its composition was agreed at the People’s Meeting. From the Maidan the government received its ministers of the humanitarian bloc, heads of the Ministry of Economic Development and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as well as the first vice premier. It was also decided then that the Maidan’s quota would also include the lustration committee and the anti-corruption bureau, which the new government promised to create in the near future. Four months later, Yehor Sobolev, who was appointed Chair of the Lustration Committee by default, spoke of the government’s failure to keep its promises. “Speaking of the promise of the current coalition to create a lustration committee – it betrayed all of us,” said Sobolev in an interview to Obozrevatel.

Sobolev says the activists proposed to the Cabinet three options for creation of the committee, but none of them had been implemented. The same fate befell the Law On Lustration.

SNIP ---------

Dazed and confused Rada

The issue of creation of the anti-corruption bureau has been removed from the parliament’s agenda. Head of the VR Committee for Fighting Corruption and Organized Crime Viktor Chumak (UDAR) blames the Cabinet officials and members of the pro-government coalition for this situation. “Most politicians and officials will not pass the inspection by such bodies, which means they will be left unemployed,” said Chumak. He stated that there are several similar bills on the anti-corruption bureau in the parliament, which complicates the procedure for putting them up to vote. Chumak, who is the author one of the bills, says the document drafted by Chornovol poses an obstacle to the successful vote. Meanwhile, Chornovol told Capital that she had a pre-emptive right in proposing legislative initiatives. “They lobbied their document because of the grant, which was allocated for it,” Chornovol accused her rivals in the parliament.