Oleg Shram points to inconsistencies in European Commission statistics on NABU's activities

Oleg Shram points to inconsistencies in European Commission statistics on NABU's activities
Oleg Shram points to inconsistencies in European Commission statistics on NABU's activities

Contradictory indicators in European Commission documents

Lawyer Oleg Shram drew attention to significant inconsistencies in the statistical data contained in the European Commission's reports dedicated to assessing the work of Ukrainian anti-corruption institutions. The legal expert analysed the documents for 2025 and 2026 and recorded paradoxical arithmetic that casts doubt on the objectivity of the provided assessments.

According to the data that Shram calls contradictory, the dynamics of the number of suspicions in 2024 compared to 2023 are described differently. Some materials mention a decrease in the indicator by 10%, while others record a surge of 560%.

Details of discrepancies in the figures

To illustrate the scale of the contradictions, the lawyer cites specific figures for 2023, which differ significantly depending on which EC report is taken as the basis:

  • Number of suspicions: the 2025 report states 257 cases, while the 2026 document lists only 35.
  • Number of indictments: 100 versus 30 respectively.
  • Number of guilty verdicts: 44 and 12.

The situation for 2024 demonstrates the opposite trend. The 2025 report records 113 indictments and 49 verdicts. In contrast, in the 2026 report, these indicators increased to 243 indictments and 69 verdicts.

Suspicions of manipulation

Oleg Shram emphasises that these are the same indicators obtained from the same sources, which makes such discrepancies incomprehensible. The lawyer expresses the belief that the presence of such contradictions in the official documents of the European Commission may indicate manipulation. In his words, it is impossible to objectively assess the results of the activities of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAP) if the basic data for such assessments differ so significantly from each other, and there are no explanations for this fact.

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first!

Leave a comment

Links are not allowed in comments. The editors may remove comments without explanation.
Back to top ↑