The National Association of Auditors of Ukraine (NAAU) Responded to Allegations of Manipulation Regarding NABU Searches at the Office of the Prosecutor General
The presence of representatives from the Ukrainian National Bar Association’s Committee for the Protection of Lawyers’ Rights during NABU’s investigative actions at the Office of the Prosecutor General in connection with the “Carthage” case was dictated solely by the requirements of the Criminal Procedure Code and the relevant law, and not by a desire “protect allies,” as certain civil society organizations are attempting to portray it.
Bogdan Kushnir, a member of the UNBA Committee for the Protection of Lawyers’ Rights and Guarantees of Legal Practice, who directly participated in the aforementioned investigative actions, published this position on his page.
According to him, the accusations from relevant civil society organizations indicate their lack of understanding of how the mechanism for protecting the practice of law functions. Kushnir emphasized that, in accordance with Article 23 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Bar and the Practice of Law,” investigative authorities are required to notify the UNAA or the regional bar association in advance of the need to involve their representative in searches of individuals who hold the status of attorney.
“Investigative authorities are required to send a letter notifying us of the need to involve a representative. We are required to respond to such letters. However, upon receiving the notification, we do not know who is being searched, the exact address, or under which criminal proceeding. All of this becomes known only when the search begins and the investigating judge’s warrant is read aloud,” explained a representative of the relevant committee.
Commenting specifically on the searches conducted as part of the “Carthage” case, Kushnir confirmed that investigative actions were carried out at the offices of Prosecutor A. Khudiev and, at that time, Prosecutor General R. Kravchenko, since both hold the status of attorneys.
Regarding Khudiev, the NAAU representative noted that he was actively practicing law and kept relevant documents at his workplace. At the same time, NABU employees did not violate attorney-client privilege, and no documents were seized.
In the case of Ruslan Kravchenko’s office, the initiative to involve the relevant committee also came from the investigation team. “Since there was no clear information as to whether Kravchenko would appear for the investigative procedure or whether he kept documents subject to attorney-client privilege in his office, the detectives decided it was necessary to involve representatives of the Committee in the search,” Kushnir emphasized, adding that the committee strictly followed the requirements of the law and ensured that rights were respected.
At the same time, Bohdan Kushnir drew attention to double standards in the work of the civil society sector. He recalled that law enforcement officials systematically violate lawyers’ rights: they use physical violence, break limbs, damage property, and use the TCC to illegally prevent defense attorneys from participating in investigative proceedings or court hearings.
However, according to him, these real threats to the legal profession go unnoticed by high-profile anti-corruption organizations, which instead use isolated procedural issues as a platform to discredit the Ukrainian National Bar Association (UNBA). The Committee representative called on critics to focus on compliance with the law rather than on spreading speculation on social media.
