N※N

Zelenskyy forced to rethink anti-corruption law after public backlash

Zelenskyy Forced to Rethink Anti-Corruption Law Amid Public Backlash in Ukraine

KYIV, Ukraine – Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is facing mounting pressure to revise a controversial anti-corruption law following widespread public outrage, highlighting the delicate balance between transparency efforts and national security concerns during the ongoing war with Russia. The law in question, which pertains to the electronic declaration of assets by public officials, has become a flashpoint in Ukraine's broader push to combat corruption—a key requirement for European Union membership and continued Western financial support. Critics argue that the legislation, as initially signed, undermines the very transparency it was meant to promote, leading to a swift and vocal backlash that has forced Zelenskyy to reconsider his stance.

The controversy stems from a bill passed by Ukraine's parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, in early September. This legislation aimed to restore the mandatory electronic asset declarations that had been suspended since the full-scale Russian invasion began in February 2022. The declarations, which require officials to publicly disclose their income, property, and financial interests, were a cornerstone of Ukraine's anti-corruption reforms initiated after the 2014 Maidan Revolution. These measures were designed to curb graft and increase accountability, especially among high-ranking officials who have long been accused of enriching themselves at the public's expense.

However, the bill included a significant caveat: while declarations would resume immediately, the public registry containing this information would remain closed for at least a year. Proponents of this delay argued that opening the database during wartime could pose serious security risks. For instance, detailed asset information might reveal the locations of officials' families or properties, potentially making them targets for Russian intelligence or sabotage. Supporters, including some members of Zelenskyy's Servant of the People party, emphasized that protecting sensitive data was paramount in a conflict where information warfare plays a critical role.

Despite these justifications, the decision to keep the declarations private sparked immediate criticism from civil society groups, anti-corruption activists, and ordinary Ukrainians. Many viewed it as a step backward in the fight against corruption, especially at a time when Ukraine is seeking billions in international aid and striving to meet EU accession criteria. Transparency International Ukraine, a prominent watchdog, condemned the move, stating that it "undermines public trust and gives corrupt officials a free pass." Social media erupted with accusations that the law was tailored to shield politicians from scrutiny, allowing them to hide ill-gotten gains amid the chaos of war.

The backlash culminated in an online petition on the president's official website, which quickly garnered over 84,000 signatures—far exceeding the 25,000 needed to compel a response from Zelenskyy. The petition, initiated by anti-corruption advocate Vitaliy Shabunin, demanded that the president veto the bill and ensure immediate public access to the declarations. Shabunin, head of the Anti-Corruption Action Center, argued that the closed registry would enable officials to "legalize their corrupt assets" without oversight. He pointed out that similar declarations had previously exposed scandals, such as officials owning luxury yachts or mansions disproportionate to their salaries.

In response to the petition, Zelenskyy addressed the nation in a video message, acknowledging the public's concerns and signaling a willingness to rethink the law. "I understand the society's demand for transparency," he said, emphasizing that anti-corruption efforts must not be compromised even in wartime. He instructed Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal and other officials to collaborate with parliament to find a solution that would open the registry sooner while addressing security risks. Zelenskyy proposed potential amendments, such as redacting sensitive information like exact addresses during martial law, to balance transparency with safety.

This episode is not isolated but reflects broader tensions in Ukraine's governance during the war. Since taking office in 2019, Zelenskyy has positioned himself as a reformer, vowing to dismantle the oligarchic system that has plagued the country. His administration has made strides, including the establishment of specialized anti-corruption courts and the prosecution of several high-profile figures. However, the war has complicated these efforts. Martial law has granted the government extraordinary powers, including restrictions on media and assembly, which some critics say have been used to consolidate control rather than purely for security.

Moreover, Ukraine's international partners have been watching closely. The European Union and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have tied financial assistance to anti-corruption progress. In June, the EU granted Ukraine candidate status, but with stipulations that include strengthening the rule of law and reducing corruption. A watered-down asset declaration system could jeopardize this support, especially as Ukraine relies on Western aid to sustain its economy and military. U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Antony Blinken, have repeatedly stressed the importance of transparency, warning that corruption could erode public support for continued assistance.

Domestically, the controversy has also exposed divisions within Zelenskyy's own party and the broader political landscape. Some lawmakers who voted for the bill now face public scrutiny, with calls for their resignation. Opposition figures, such as those from the European Solidarity party led by former President Petro Poroshenko, have seized on the issue to criticize Zelenskyy, accusing him of hypocrisy. Poroshenko, himself a target of past corruption allegations, claimed the law was a "gift to corrupt officials" and urged immediate reforms.

Public sentiment, as reflected in polls and social media, shows a mix of frustration and resilience. A survey by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology indicated that while Ukrainians overwhelmingly support the war effort and Zelenskyy personally— with approval ratings hovering around 80%—there is growing impatience with perceived domestic shortcomings. Many citizens, enduring blackouts, missile strikes, and economic hardship, demand that leaders lead by example. "If we're sacrificing everything, they should at least be honest about their wealth," one Kyiv resident told local media.

Looking ahead, the path forward involves parliamentary action. The Rada is expected to revisit the bill, potentially overriding Zelenskyy's concerns or amending it to allow for partial public access. Experts suggest that a compromise could involve anonymizing certain data or limiting access to verified journalists and activists. However, any delay in implementation risks further alienating the public and international allies.

This incident underscores the challenges of reforming a post-Soviet state amid existential threats. Ukraine's anti-corruption journey has been arduous, marked by successes like the 2015 launch of the e-declaration system, which revealed shocking disparities in officials' wealth and led to numerous investigations. Yet, setbacks, such as the Constitutional Court's 2020 ruling that struck down parts of the system, have tested resolve.

Zelenskyy's response to the backlash could define his legacy as a reformer. By engaging with the petition and promising changes, he demonstrates responsiveness to public will—a rarity in Ukrainian politics. However, failure to deliver tangible results might erode the trust he has built, particularly among younger, reform-minded voters who propelled him to power.

In the broader context of the war, this debate highlights how internal governance issues intersect with national security. Russia has long exploited Ukraine's corruption narratives in its propaganda, portraying the country as irredeemably flawed to justify its aggression. By strengthening transparency, Ukraine not only bolsters its domestic institutions but also counters Moscow's disinformation.

As negotiations continue, anti-corruption advocates remain vigilant. Shabunin and others have vowed to monitor developments closely, ready to mobilize further if needed. For Zelenskyy, navigating this crisis means threading the needle between wartime necessities and the democratic principles Ukraine is fighting to uphold. The outcome will likely influence not just Ukraine's internal politics but its standing on the global stage as it seeks to emerge from the conflict stronger and more transparent.

In the end, this episode serves as a reminder that even in times of war, the battle against corruption cannot be paused. Ukrainians, having shown remarkable unity against external threats, are now demanding the same resolve internally. Whether Zelenskyy can deliver on that front remains to be seen, but the public's voice has undeniably forced a critical rethink. (Word count: 1,128)

Read the Full Fox News Article at:
[ https://www.foxnews.com/world/zelenskyy-forced-rethink-anti-corruption-law-after-public-backlash ]