"Patriots-Dodgers": how corrupt officials avoid punishment by using mobilization as a cover

Currently in Ukraine, a highly alarming trend is observed: certain citizens who are brought to justice or already convicted for corruption and other socially dangerous crimes attempt to evade criminal responsibility through mobilization to the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU).

This practice raises serious concerns about strengthening the habit of impunity and potential decriminalization of corruption, notes the publication ZAXID.net.

The issue recently became hot again in connection with the case of the former head of the State Fiscal Service of Ukraine, Roman Nasirov. Despite serious corruption charges, he wanted and almost succeeded in avoiding punishment, allegedly voluntarily joining the army. This happened at the stage of court debates, practically just before the verdict was announced. And since this former official’s story was widely covered in the media, such an outcome could not satisfy the public. The noise in the country’s information space forced the authorities to backtrack.

At the same time, the Ministry of Defence declared that individuals convicted of particularly serious corruption crimes would not be able to avoid punishment through mobilization. The department demonstratively referred to the relevant legal norms. However, in practice, the picture is somewhat different. Despite the declared official position, a number of exposed offenders have managed to "dodge" rightful retribution by covering themselves with an order for enlistment in the AFU.

Recently, the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) reported shocking news: recently, almost half a hundred individuals mobilized to the AFU "on their own initiative" after being sent to court with indictments. In connection with this, the consideration of their cases has been suspended, and the statute of limitations is expiring. Naturally, this sharply increases the risk that they will manage to escape punishment.

“Unfortunately, the mobilization of defendants in SAPO and NABU cases has become one of the current and popular methods of avoiding criminal responsibility,” lamented the SAPO leadership.

This admission sharpens the problem specifically on the exposed corrupt individuals, as these institutions only deal with such criminal cases. How did such a dangerous trend arise? Unfortunately, the authorities themselves are to blame. Using the need to replenish the AFU as a cover, a bill was pushed through the Verkhovna Rada that allows for such "laundering" operations. It all started, if memory serves, with such a statement from Minister of Justice Denys Malyuska: "Corrupt officials, I think, can be quite calmly sent to fight."

Justifying this dubious thesis in an interview with journalists last March, the head of the legal department went on to say that these people are often patriots, it’s just their patriotism is "peculiar" and they are "greedy."

"Well, not only greedy, but let’s be honest. Our country has been cultivating corruption for decades. Some to a greater extent, some to a lesser extent, but it was widespread and remains a widespread phenomenon. So to say ‘wow, he’s a corrupt official’... We had a social survey where the majority of people acknowledged giving bribes in the form of gifts or money to doctors, teachers, patrol officers” – Malyuska mused, either joking or seriously reflecting.

Such verbal outbursts cannot be considered in isolation from the state position of the person. Malyuska is not a secondary official who went through, like many hasty "servants of the people," just an amusing week-long training for MPs at the Truskavets resort.

This official should embody not only legality and order but also moral guidelines. In this context, his explanation looks like an attempt to justify systemic corruption in the country, presenting it as an integral part of the national culture. He practically directly called people who knowingly caused enormous harm to the country "patriots," suggesting that it just so happened these citizens have a distorted perception of patriotism, which manifests itself in greed. Well, who hasn’t, so to speak?

Moreover, such words from the head of the Ministry of Justice can be seen as promoting impunity and attempting to soften responsibility for corruption offenses under the guise of so-called "patriotism." And the assertion that corruption is part of the country’s cultural heritage can be considered a direct insult to Ukraine and its people.

Needless to say, if corruption is perceived almost as a "national code," then fighting it becomes practically impossible? And sending lovers of taking bribes and kickbacks to the AFU looks more like an ineffective populist move than a real solution to the problem of replenishing combat units. After all, they are unlikely to be very useful there, but they often cause quite noticeable harm.

An example that comes to mind is another high-profile case – with former judge of the Kyiv District Court of Odesa Lyudmyla Saltan, who was caught receiving a bribe of $4,000 for making a necessary decision in a civil case. After being removed from her position, she mobilized to the AFU in October 2024, but was soon spotted drunk while on duty. It was reported that the command submitted an appropriate complaint, but it seemed ridiculous against the backdrop of the damage to public morality caused by this individual.

It doesn’t take many examples for officials at all levels to quickly learn: bribes can supposedly be taken, and if caught, one can "volunteer" to join one of the not-so-hot units... As a result, something resembling a game of "hide and seek" is observed. High-ranking officials announced "zero tolerance" for corruption in territorial recruitment centers (TRC). And a whole industry has unfolded locally to falsify documents allowing one to "dodge" mobilization.

But I would not like to focus only on corruption in the TRC now. The issue is much broader. If the state creates loopholes for evading punishment for committed offenses under one "important" pretext, there will always be those who seek and create similar loopholes where they seemingly should not exist in principle.

For example, Kulyk, a judge of Koretskyi District Court of Rivne Region, and lawyer Turovych were exposed by NABU and SAPO detectives immediately after receiving a large bribe for closing an administrative case concerning driving under the influence.

This case happened in April 2023, but one has to recall it because the bribers managed to avoid imprisonment for a rather strange, from the standpoint of true justice, reason: they made a "plea agreement" with the court, and also...their posted bails were redirected to the needs of the AFU, particularly the “Army of Drones” project.

Over the past few years, there have been many such examples where seemingly "voluntary" money transfers from people who, as they say, have money to spare, for army needs led to release from deserved punishment. The state seemed to be signaling to citizens: money doesn’t stink.

For a country in a state of defensive war, this can be catastrophic. I am not speaking now about issues with real justice – in Ukraine, problems with it have been felt since the early days of independence due to the deep-rooted corruption of many judges and behind-the-scenes interests at the very top.

I would like to draw attention to the fundamental issue of trust now. When people begin to perceive state institutions as something corrupt, something that can be brushed aside with money, they lose confidence not only in justice but also in the very ability of these institutions to act for the good of the country and its citizens. It undermines the very foundation of democracy, turning it into a simulacrum where, essentially, no one is obligated to follow the laws if you have the resources to bypass them.

In this context, it does not matter who you are – military personnel or civilian, a servant of Themis or a gang member. Only status and the ability to "grease the palm" at the right moment matter.

Here I would like to return to the role of Minister Malyuska. He has repeatedly been involved in scandals after which, in any decent country, such an official would forever be barred from the state apparatus. What is it worth, for example, providing inaccurate information in his declaration of income, expenses, and property. The submission of such declarations is the most important anticorruption mechanism.

"The inaccurate information differs from accurate data by 146,060 hryvnias," noted the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). And immediately, the authorities began to gush forth "arguments" in defense of the minister: they say the amount is insufficient to bring the violator to criminal or administrative responsibility. Moral principles for officials, it seems, do not matter.

The list of telling incidents involving Malyuska is simply astonishing. At one time, Member of Parliament Serhiy Rakhmanin even called him "the weakest Minister of Justice in the entire history of Ukraine." But for the current ruling elite of the country, such a character seems very convenient: against his background, nepotism and other questionable practices that have long become the "calling card" of Ukrainian bureaucracy are less striking.

Such a Minister of Justice is like a screen behind which not only one’s mistakes but also systemic failures can be hidden. The person has no particular authority or reputation but is loyal and compliant. And this, as the last few years have shown, is valued much higher than competence or a sense of responsibility to society.

Taking all this into account, it is not worth rejoicing that the exposed Nasirov was returned to the courtroom under media pressure. This figure in corruption cases did not manage to dodge the court – others will, don’t doubt it. After all, the system is clearly being built on the basis of loyalty and mutual cover-up, where morality is replaced by expediency and the law by "flexibility," paid for with money, which is often stolen. A country that goes down this path risks losing not only the war but also the future peace. Because if the state does not reconsider the vicious practice of “laundering” bribers under various plausible pretexts, even a hard-won victory in battles will not save it from internal degradation.

Author: Oleksandr Kosvintsev