Kyiv, Ukraine – In a hearing hall shaded by the war, one of the most controversial legal battles in Ukraine continues to take place. At his center is Pavlo Barbul, a former initiate of the defense industry once congratulated corruption, but who has since been accused of the very crimes that he claimed to discover. Prosecutors insist that the accusations reflect systemic abuses in the Defense trade of Ukraine, a sector historically tainted by opaque agreements and corruption scandals.
His case, covering years and continents, has become a decisive test for Ukraine’s commitment to the rule of law in wartime. With links with the highly publicized assassination of Andriy Portnov, a controversial political figure, the trial raises the question: where the fight against corruption and political retribution begins?
A denunciator who has become a defendant
Barbul, born in 1987 in Odesa, led the public defense intermediary SpetsTechnoxport from 2015 to 2018. This organization facilitates contracts between manufacturers of Ukrainian weapons and foreign governments. During his mandate, Barbul explained an alleged corruption involving business officials and intermediaries linked to high -ranking political families.
Shortly after having done the allegations, Barbul himself was at the Headquarters as a national anti-corruption office in Ukraine and the office of the specialized anti-corruption prosecutor launched criminal procedures against him. The law exempts the denunciators of the responsibility to report corruption – if their reports are reliable and unintentional false.
The first case, posted in 2017, accuses Barbul of diverting more than $ 2.2 million through an agency contract with Global Marketing SP, a company registered in the United Arab Emirates. A second case, filed in 2019, involves similar allegations linked to contracts with defense companies, notably Artem and Aviakon, and Spetstechnoxport.
Critics note that the Ukraine arms export sector has long been a breeding ground for transplants and affirms that cases like this can be suffering to fight against rooted abuses. Yuriy Godymenko, head of the public anti-corruption council of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, said publicly that the defense sector was “worse than chaos” and needs radical reforms.
Barbul denies allegations, claiming that the payments in question arise from the agreements signed in 2009 – years before becoming the director of Spetstechnoxport. Barbul’s defense stresses that eight exams of state experts have confirmed that no financial loss was suffered by the State, but Barbul – not its predecessors at Spetstechnoxport – remains a defendant in both cases.
It is not clear if Barbul has personally benefited from contracts under investigation, and no court has yet established his guilt or his innocence.
Allegations of political persecution
Barbul’s legal team, led by lawyer Oleksi Miagokyi, says that affairs are politically motivated – reprisals for its denunciator. They say that the prosecutor’s team has carried out illegal surveillance, put pressure on expert witnesses and tried to abuse international mechanisms such as Interpol alerts. His relatives were affected by asset crises, and there was a persistent media campaign representing him as a “thief” and a “traitor”, although there are no court decisions indicating that it is true.
All this despite the fact that in 2021, the Ukrainian national agency on the prevention of corruption granted the status of official denunciator of Barbul.
The Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group and other human rights organizations have criticized the management of Barbul cases. According to the Barbul Barbul groups, groups violate both Ukrainian law and the European Convention on Human Rights, citing excessive surety and legal passivity, among others.
Portnov connection
The complaint that sparked the prosecution of Barbul was filed by Portnov, a former high-level assistant from the pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych. Portnov was widely considered an informal lever effect on certain parts of the judiciary. Its media presence and legal initiatives have often targeted political opponents of the previous administration.
On May 21, Portnov was killed near the American school in Pozuelo in Alarcón, a suburb of Madrid, while he was depositing his children. The Spanish authorities have described the attack as a planned blow involving several attackers. Ukrainian national police and the prosecutor’s office have opened a homicide case, although Spain refused to form a joint investigation team.
In September, we do not know who killed Portnov.
The death of Portnov throws a shadow on the cases he initiated, including that against Barbul. Although there is no direct evidence connecting the two events, his assassination underlines the environment with high issues in which anti-corruption and political influence intertwine.
Justice or reprisals?
Barbul’s lawyers say that the authorities have ignored evidence that could exempt it. However, anti-corruption managers argue that these defenses are common in cases of high-level transplant and that public pressure often hinders investigations on defense purchases.
Meanwhile, the State’s investigation office has closed several times and has reopened the related cases concerning the alleged misunderstanding by anti-corruption detectives, only for the Ukrainian courts to cancel the decisions to close the investigations on illegal actions against Barbul, citing incomplete or biased requests.
In February, Interpol added Barbul’s name to his list of research, although he informed the Ukrainian authorities of his alliance.
“This is an example of a manual of how anti-corruption tools can be transformed into personal or political vendetta instruments,” Miagokyi told Global Press Journal. “My client has cooperated with the investigators, provided their location and has always been declared fugitive. Meanwhile, those who have orchestrated corrupt years for years before it remain intact. ”
The requests for comments sent to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, the office of the specialized anti-corruption prosecutor and the Ukraine anti-corruption court remained unanswered.
A frightening effect on denunciators
The Ukraine war in Russia has intensified a meticulous examination on defense and purchases.
While the anti-corruption bodies have acquired new powers, some warn these tools increasingly used to silence dissent.
“If the denunciators see what is happening in Pavlo Barbul, they will think twice before running,” said a legal analyst based in kyiv who asked for anonymity because he is not allowed to speak to the press. “The border between responsibility and political revenge becomes dangerously vague.”
The frightening effect is already obvious. According to a report by the coalition of southeast Europe on the protection of the denunciators, the fear of reprisals – including harassment, employment loss and reputation attacks – continues to dissuade the initiates from manifesting themselves, in particular in cases related to national security and military contracts.
What awaits us?
In September, Barbul remains abroad, his movements limited by the interpol opinion he disputes. His legal team is preparing an appeal for the European Court of Human Rights, arguing that Ukraine had violated its right to a fair trial and freedom of movement.
Meanwhile, the unresolved murder of Portnov adds a layer of uncertainty. The result of this case will not only test Ukraine’s ability to protect the denunciators, but also its determination to hold powerful defense initiated responsible when credible allegations occur. Some observers speculate that he could derail the current cases related to the influence of Portnov; Others fear that this can intensify efforts to continue its old targets, to demonstrate that its inheritance of pressure has not ended with its death.