The appointment of a brand new Prosecutor Common has as soon as once more drawn public consideration to this establishment. However what issues extra is that this: what ought to the Prosecutor’s Workplace appear to be throughout wartime and after? Can it develop into the middle that unites the efforts of the whole regulation enforcement and justice system?

Within the first months of the full-scale conflict, Ukrainians impressed the world with their cohesion, self-organization, and swift decision-making free from extreme paperwork. Individuals acted immediately, difficult concern and inertia. The emergency united society: volunteers and police operated as a single mechanism, the army and medics as a coordinated organism. It appeared we had all tapped into an inside useful resource to beat chaos.

Nevertheless, only a few months later, within the rear, the previous issues started to resurface. Warfare destroys not solely buildings – it undermines the authorized system, weakens coordination between state establishments, and creates fertile floor for impunity. Fragmentation, institutional competitors, and delays in decision-making returned. New, larger-scale challenges additionally emerged. Society calls for justice – not just for the conflict crimes of which a whole lot of 1000’s have been dedicated – but in addition for human rights violations, corruption, abuse of energy, crimes in opposition to property, life, and security. But this demand can’t be met and not using a clear coordination mechanism. The Prosecutor’s Workplace needs to be the middle of this course of, setting prison prosecution coverage and establishing nationwide coordination priorities.

Following the 2014–2016 prosecutorial reform, the operate of so-called "normal oversight" was abolished – a component that had survived for many years in Ukraine’s authorized custom as a Soviet-era legacy. In 2016, amendments to the Structure outlined the prosecution’s features as: representing public prosecution in court docket; organizing and overseeing pretrial investigations; addressing different authorized issues throughout prison proceedings; supervising covert and investigative actions by regulation enforcement companies; and representing the state in court docket in distinctive circumstances outlined by regulation. The reform aimed to scale back energy focus throughout the prosecution and produce it nearer to European requirements. The Venice Fee supported this in its conclusions, noting that the Soviet-style "normal supervision" was incompatible with the rules of the rule of regulation. In Opinion No. 735/2013 on the draft regulation "On the Prosecution," the Fee emphasised the necessity for the prosecution to deal with prison prosecution, illustration of the state, and safety of residents’ rights. This wasn’t about eradicating the prosecution from the justice system, however about reforming it – with clear division of powers, depoliticization, and adherence to the rule of regulation. Nonetheless, the Structure doesn’t point out the coordination operate, which might assist outline the prosecution’s position throughout the prison justice system, investigative our bodies, and companies liable for punishment enforcement. At present, below martial regulation, constitutional amendments are presently unattainable, however such a step could be very important sooner or later. Correct implementation of the coordination operate would additionally assist eradicate the present substitution of regulation enforcement companies.

The present regulation partially addresses this challenge. Article 9 of the Regulation of Ukraine "On the Prosecutor’s Workplace" defines coordination as considered one of its key features. Nevertheless, this provision stays remoted – missing supporting mechanisms, integration into associated authorized acts, and enforcement measures. Consequently: duplicated investigations of the identical offenses; prison circumstances being bounced between companies with notes like "not below our jurisdiction"; misplaced proceedings; prosecutors inspecting crime scenes themselves; departments duplicating the features of regulation enforcement our bodies – resulting in fragmented sources, delays, suspects fleeing overseas, and extra. The Prosecutor’s Workplace is the one establishment able to guaranteeing actual cooperation amongst regulation enforcement and supervisory our bodies in prison justice to forestall and fight crime and corruption. But it fails to take action, primarily resulting from systemic limitations slightly than inner unwillingness.

In a rustic concurrently combating a conflict and making an attempt reforms, this can be a direct waste of potential. To understand the size of the difficulty, take into account only a few high-profile circumstances – from protection sector abuses to investigations into stolen humanitarian help. In every case: institutional misalignment, unclear jurisdiction, lack of a typical investigative technique. In the meantime, the variety of crimes grows.

Historical past reveals that after main wars, societies face not simply financial devastation, but in addition crime surges. After WWI, many European nations skilled hyperinflation, unemployment, and authorized instability, which fostered organized crime – particularly amid the demobilization of tens of millions. In postwar Germany of the Twenties, the crime charge rose so sharply that police in lots of areas misplaced management of the streets. After WWII, nations like France, Italy, Ukraine, and others noticed spikes in armed assaults, murders, robberies, black-market commerce, smuggling, and crimes involving leftover weapons in arms of civilians.

Ukraine should be taught from these classes. We can’t afford delay – not to mention imitation. Crime doesn’t disappear throughout conflict – it modifications kind. Already, within the rear, we’re seeing an increase within the shadow economic system, financial crimes, corruption, unlawful arms trafficking. There’s been a surge in raider assaults masked by martial regulation, fraud, and home violence. Arson, sabotage, and provocations are being recorded. After the combating ends, we might face crimes involving new forms of weapons (e.g., FPV drones), in addition to violence linked to PTSD, and clashes between civilians and demobilized troopers. This might end result within the emergence of a brand new sort of prison surroundings and fragmentation of the rule of regulation. To keep away from repeating previous tragedies, we should act preventively now.

In these circumstances, the classical mannequin of combating crime is ineffective. Every company operates independently, with its personal plan and media coverage. Joint conferences exist, however usually serve a purely formal position – one thing is signed, pictures are taken. Resolutions carry no obligation, no sanctions, no authorized binding. Establishments operate – however not successfully collectively. A vacuum kinds, ripe for criminality. Regardless of its standing, the Prosecutor Common presently lacks the authority to implement joint technique implementation. In 2021, the Prosecutor Common issued a declarative order on coordination (No. 28, amended by Order No. 3 of 02.01.2023), however in apply, it amounted to mere imitation.

The Prosecutor’s Workplace, as an establishment of stability, might develop into the unifying physique. Not as a superstructure with limitless powers, however as an organizational middle, with entry to operational info for coordination and the flexibility to interact in preventative exercise (i.e., crime prevention). Not a punitive company, not a political software – however a framework that brings collectively fragments of justice scattered throughout dozens of our bodies. This mannequin already exists in some European nations, although with totally different approaches. In France, prosecutors maintain broad administrative powers to coordinate regulation enforcement, serving as a central hub. In Italy, the prosecution service is granted procedural and administrative coordination powers over all regulation enforcement actions. Even in Poland, whose construction resembles ours, the Prosecutor Common (additionally the Minister of Justice) is vested with prolonged coordination and supervisory powers and may provoke the creation of interagency investigative teams with participation from the Anti-Corruption Bureau, police, and different regulation enforcement our bodies.

So why haven’t we moved on this path? Partly resulting from inertia. Partly resulting from concern of reverting to the Soviet-style prosecution system. However legislative gaps have created the phantasm of neutrality – behind which lie chaos and impunity. With out actual coordination, the prison justice system will fail to satisfy societal calls for.

What needs to be achieved? In the beginning, develop the coordination operate in regulation. It should be clearly outlined within the Structure of Ukraine, the core regulation, and outlined in departmental authorized acts. The grounds, procedures, timelines, monitoring, accountability, and implementation mechanisms should be specified. The Prosecutor’s Workplace needs to be obligated to convene and manage joint conferences, kind interagency investigative groups, and align investigative approaches. Common, public reporting with actual knowledge – not imprecise generalities – should be ensured. Accountability needs to be each parliamentary and public. And above all, there should be political will to construct a brand new type of Prosecutor’s Workplace – not one which punishes indiscriminately, nor one which observes powerlessly, however one that’s institutionally accountable and able to efficient coordination.