Weaponized Accountability: When Due Process Becomes Ammunition
By: Giorgio Provinciali
Live from Ukraine ??
Kropyvnytskyj Ukrainian foreign intelligence claims that the Kremlin has identified three strategies to run a media campaign aimed at destabilizing Ukraine and reducing foreign support by hiding Russias military failures and economic problems: discrediting Ukraines military mobilization and leadership, discrediting Zelensky and his associates, and stopping the media scandal surrounding Yermak and Yuliia Mendels interview from being removed from the European information space.
Signs of its activation are already apparent, as even amid extremeeventslike the most devastating Russian attack since the start of the war and Ukraines largest response in the Moscow region part of the Italian media has turned attention to a story involving a man linked to a case initiated by Ukrainian anti-corruption agencies NABU and SAP.
The Kremlin is fully aware of which Western media outlets are best suited to amplify any useful narrative against Kyiv. Several voices, speaking with a judicial tone, have depicted the former head of Ukraines Presidents Office as if he were already a common criminal, suggesting he might be allowed to return to light with an electronic bracelet instead of acknowledging him as a suspect still protected by the presumption of innocence. Celebratory descriptions of the arrest and cryptic remarks about Zelensky not being a suspect in the case have been circulating for days on social media, echoing the ongoing waves of drone strikes and civilian casualties.
Guilty or innocent, Andriy Yermak has already been weaponized into information ammunition. While the presumption of innocence is a right under the rule of law even against propaganda many in Italy have argued the opposite: that the strength of the Rule of Law lies in its ability to reach anyone, unequivocally, regardless of the situation.
The current Russian regime doesnt need to either absolve or condemn Yermak: as long as Europe talks about Ukraine not as a country hit by bombs and missiles, capable of a large-scale response in the fifth year of its invasion, but as a corrupt and decayed system to keep its distance from, the goal is reached.
The European Union Ambassador, Katarna Mathernov, herselfstatedthat the procedure could be used in the hybrid war against Ukraine, and that the fact a former head of the presidency appears before the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) shows the institutions ability to function even during a Russian invasion. A politically correct, yet incomplete statement, because the real issue with a procedure involving the most powerful man in the Ukrainian presidential system just as Ukraine is fighting its most difficult war in history isnt just how Moscow can exploit it.
Faced with pressure on Kyiv and all the American political interference elsewhere,many in Ukraine argued that Washington was trying to exert influence on formally independent and nearly untouchable organizations like anti-corruption groups to sway Ukrainian power from within. A thesis that cannot be proven, yet neither dismissed as paranoia, considering the entire Ukrainian anti-corruption system was built within a web of Western influence, internationalized decisions, technical assistance, funding, audits, and cooperation.
Appearing before the court as an activist and journalist, Irma Krattdeclaredat the end of Yermaks hearing that he would be persecuted for alleged work aimed at restoring Ukraine to nuclear power status. A weak yet difficult to prove explanation, but its media success speaks volumes about the climate surrounding the case. With approximately 200 payments and contributions from individuals and legal entities, the deposit of 140 million hryvnia about 3 million euros waspaidin full within a short timeframe, allowing Yermak to bereleasedfrom the detention center.
Are NABU and SAP independent from the Ukrainian government? In part, yes, and that is precisely their purpose. But they are not independent from the Western conditionality architecture that they generated, financed, protected, and shaped. NABUs official storyspeaks: its establishment wasboundby all the demands of international partners, and its director, Semen Kryvonos, waschosenby a commission that included representatives of foreign organizations.
Since February 2022, through INL, the U.S. Department of State hasdedicatedmore than $50 million to strengthening Ukrainian anti-corruption institutions, including NABU and SAP. It hasassistedthe NABU staff selection process with psychological testing and assessments. It hasdeployedan FBI anti-corruption special agent to Kyiv to work embedded with NABU. It hassupportedSAPs operational separation from the Prosecutor Generals Office by providing services, equipment, computers, and support for the communications team.Memorandabetween U.S. inspectorates and their Ukrainian counterparts alsoformalizeinformation exchange, investigative cooperation, and, when appropriate, joint investigations.
Europe is also not a spectator. The EU Anti-Corruption Initiativedescribesits collaboration with NABU as a systemic and long-term partnership. It has supported the eCase digital infrastructure, whichconnectsNABU, SAPO, and HACC into a single ecosystem. Itsupportedlegislative reforms and the inclusion of international experts in the selection of top officials. Even the process for selecting judges at the High Anti-Corruption Court involves a public Council of international experts with profiles from the United States, Canada, the Netherlands, Estonia, and Lithuania,recommendedby the EU, OLAF, and the OECD.
Calling it independence is therefore an oversimplification. It is independence from Ukrainian political power achieved through structural reliance on Western conditionality, funding, training, auditing, and legitimacy.
This doesnt prove external involvement, nor does it indicate that a single investigation was ordered from Washington, Brussels, or any other capital. However, it shows that Ukrainian anti-corruption efforts also serve as a form of external intervention aimed at preventing internal control.
It may have been necessary. It may have produced results. It may have saved investigations that the old system would have buried. Butit is not sovereign neutrality.
If not subject to very clear limits, any power of interdiction can be turned into a tool of political pressure.
Corruption must be fought. But when Western media overlook the dead buried under the rubble to focus on a still-open case,the Law is not celebrated: it is enlisted.
In 1.549 days of war, we recorded over 250 videos from ground zero and wrote more than 1,500 articles.
We are doing our best to provide genuine, first-hand reports from zones where almost no press dares to go. This means living in a kill zone constantly. We take the risk, but without your invaluable support, our voices would remain unheard and silent. Without brave people sharing our articles from afar, they would remain unread. Our reports would go unseen, and our efforts would be lost. Theres still a lot of work to do here, as the people around us are also in no better situation.
Were renewing our fundraising campaign and thanking everyone who joins us in helping to restore what Russia is destroying. Moving forward with only a small reimbursement for each article from a brave newspaper that believes in us is extremely challenging. Thats why we are grateful to all the kind people who support us and trust in our mission.
Even a small donation helps.
Well keep you updated on developments.
Thank you all, dear friends ??
武器化的問責：當正當程序淪為彈藥
作者：Giorgio Provinciali
翻譯：旺財球球
烏克蘭前線報道??
克羅皮夫尼茨基烏克蘭對外情報機構稱，克裏姆林宮已確定三種策略，試圖通過媒體運動，破壞烏克蘭穩定並削弱外界支持，同時掩蓋俄羅斯的軍事失利和經濟問題：抹黑烏克蘭的軍事動員與領導層、抹黑澤連斯基及其同僚，以及阻止圍繞耶爾馬克與尤利婭門德爾采訪的媒體醜聞從歐洲信息空間被清除。
（圖：烏克蘭對外情報機構的一則帖文）
這些行動跡象已開始顯現，即便在像自戰爭開始以來最具破壞性的俄羅斯襲擊以及烏克蘭在莫斯科地區的最大規模反擊這類極端事件發生時，意大利部分媒體的注意力仍轉向了一起與烏克蘭反腐機構NABU與SAP發起的案件相關的男子的故事。
（圖表出處並致謝：TopLeadEU
克裏姆林宮非常清楚哪些西方媒體最適合放大任何對基輔不利的敘事。若幹帶有司法口吻的聲音，已經將前總統辦公廳主任描述得仿佛是已被定罪的普通罪犯，暗示他或可佩戴電子腳鐐重見天日，而非承認他仍作為嫌疑人應受無罪推定保護。有關逮捕的慶祝性描述以及關於澤連斯基並非該案嫌疑人的隱晦言論在社交媒體上流傳數日，與持續的無人機襲擊與平民傷亡浪潮相呼應。
（音頻：與各位分享我作為Mark McNamee節目History in the Maling: The War in Ukraine來賓的最新發言）
無論有罪或無罪，安德烈耶爾馬克已被武器化為信息彈藥。盡管無罪推定是法治下的一項權利即使在麵對宣傳戰也不例外，但許多意大利人卻持相反觀點：認為法治的力量在於其能無條件、明確地伸及任何人，不受局勢限製。
當前的俄國政權並不需要對耶爾馬克開脫，也無需定罪：隻要歐洲談論烏克蘭時，不再將其視為一個遭導彈與炸彈打擊、卻仍能在戰爭第五年實施大規模反擊的國家，而是視其為一個腐敗衰敗、應保持距離的體係，其目標就已經實現。
（視頻：不久將有另一期類似倫敦時報前線的節目。我將直接從烏克蘭頓涅茨克州錄製??）
歐盟駐烏大使卡塔麗娜馬特爾諾娃本人表示，該程序可能被用於對烏克蘭的混合戰爭中，而一名前總統辦公廳主任出現在高等反腐法院（HACC）受審也表明烏機構即便在俄羅斯入侵期間也能運作。此番表述政治上正確卻不完整，問題的關鍵，並不僅在於莫斯科如何利用此案，而在於：當烏克蘭正經曆曆史上最艱難的戰爭，這一涉及總統體係中最有權勢人物的程序本身意味著什麽。
麵對對基輔的壓力以及美國在其他領域的政治幹預，烏克蘭許多人認為華盛頓試圖對形式上獨立、且幾乎不可觸及的組織，如反腐機構施加影響，以從內部左右烏克蘭權力。這一論斷無法證實，但也不能簡單地歸為偏執，考慮到整個烏克蘭反腐體係是在西方影響網絡內建立的，伴隨國際化決策、技術援助、資金、審計與合作。
以活動家和記者身份出庭的伊爾瑪克拉特在耶爾馬克聽證會結束時宣稱，他將因據稱旨在恢複烏克蘭為核強國的工作而被迫害。該解釋站不住腳且難以證明，但其在媒體上的成功充分說明了案件周邊的輿論氛圍。通過約200筆個人和法人支付與捐款，1.4億格裏夫納（約合300萬歐元）的保證金在短期內全額繳納，使耶爾馬克得以從羈押中心獲釋。
（圖：伊爾瑪克拉特在耶爾馬克聽證後發言照片來自RBK Ukraine的視頻）
NABU和SAP是否獨立於烏克蘭政府？在某種程度上是的，這正是其設立的初衷。但它們並非獨立於西方塑造、資助、保護並影響的條件性架構。NABU的官方說辭顯示：其成立與國際夥伴的要求密不可分，其主任謝門克呂沃諾斯也是由包含外國組織代表的委員會選出。
自2022年2月以來，通過INL，美國國務院已投入逾5000萬美元以加強烏克蘭反腐機構，包括NABU與SAP。它協助NABU人員遴選程序，提供心理測試與評估；派遣FBI反腐特工駐基輔，與NABU並肩工作；通過提供服務、設備、電腦及通訊團隊支持，協助SAP實現從檢察總長辦公室的操作性獨立。美國監察機構與烏方對應機構之間的備忘錄也使信息交流、調查合作以及在適當情況下的聯合調查製度化。
歐洲也並非旁觀者。歐盟反腐倡議將其與NABU的合作描述為係統性且長期的夥伴關係。它支持連接NABU、SAPO與HACC的eCase數字基礎設施，推動立法改革並將國際專家納入高層官員遴選程序。即便是高等反腐法院法官的遴選過程，也涉及一由美國、加拿大、荷蘭、愛沙尼亞和立陶宛專家組成的公開國際專家委員會，係歐盟、OLAF及經合組織推薦。
因此稱之為獨立過於簡化。它是一種通過對西方條件、資金、培訓、審計與合法性結構性依賴而實現的、相對於烏克蘭政治權力的獨立。
這並不證明存在外部介入，也不表明某項調查是由華盛頓、布魯塞爾或其他任何首都下令發起的。然而，這顯示烏克蘭的反腐努力也作為一種外部幹預機製，旨在防止內部失控。
這可能是必要的。可能取得了成效。可能挽救了舊體製本會掩埋的調查。但它並非主權中立。
如果缺乏非常明確的界限，任何幹預權力都可能被轉化為政治施壓的工具。
必須打擊腐敗。但當西方媒體忽視埋在瓦礫下的死者，而把注意力放在一起尚未結案的案件上時，法律並非受到頌揚：它被征用。
***
在1549天的戰爭中，我們從前線錄製了250多段視頻，並撰寫了1500多篇文章。
我們盡最大努力從幾乎沒有媒體敢進入的地帶進行真實的一手報道，這意味著我們長期生活在殺傷區。我們承擔風險，但若沒有你們寶貴的支持，我們的聲音將無從傳出。若沒有遠方的勇敢的人們轉發分享我們的文章，它們將無人問津。我們的報道會被忽視，我們的努力將付諸流水。這裏還有大量工作要做，周圍的人們境況同樣艱難。
我們正在更新籌款活動，感謝每一位加入我們、幫助修複俄羅斯破壞的人們。僅靠一家勇敢的報紙為我們每篇文章支付微薄稿酬以維持前線報道極為困難。因此，我們感激所有支持並信任我們使命的善良人們。
哪怕是小小的捐助也有助益。
我們會持續為你們更新事態進展。
謝謝大家，親愛的朋友們??
如果你認可我們的工作，請支持我們??
在過去三年裏，自烏克蘭大規模戰爭爆發以來，作為自由撰稿人，我們一直在烏克蘭戰爭的所有前線進行報道
https://www.paypal.com/pools/c/9piP8j9xY5
