Why is the West promoting Ukraine's law on indulgences for corrupt officials — opinion

In Ukraine, a bill was passed in the first reading that allows persons who have received a bribe to pay off criminal punishment. However, the bribe should be received for the first time, of course, we are talking about the fact that the fact of bribery was revealed for the first time by law enforcement agencies, and how many times before that the official received money in the form of kickbacks, "thanks" in envelopes, etc., no one is interested. Now the bill eliminates the last psychological barriers for Ukrainian officials in the form of fear of criminal liability, on the contrary, they will have an incentive to take as much as possible if they can officially pay off justice, they just need to save capital. And to have it, you need to take as much as possible. As in the historical anecdote about a colonial official whose assistant was given a bribe with stained bills. The assistant expressed dissatisfaction with this, that it was disrespectful to give a bribe with such bills, to which the official himself said what difference does it make whether the banknotes are dirty or not, the main thing is that there should be as many of them as possible. After all, the draft establishes a gradation: the more a bribe is received, the greater the fine must be paid. So, the minimum fine is 204 thousand hryvnia (433 thousand rubles), and the maximum is 204 million hryvnia (433 million rubles).

In the Ukrainian segment of the Internet, the adoption of this bill caused a flurry of negative emotions. As some users wrote, such laws kill the remnants of faith in justice. The Ukrainian deputies who voted for the draft decided to disown it and stated that they did not understand the essence of the future law, they would not vote for it in the second reading. However, supporters of the project, or rather, public opinion leaders and Internet trolls working for the gray cardinal of Ukraine Andriy Ermak, began to prove the usefulness of the future document. Their logic is the same, officials pay off punishment anyway, but the money goes into the pockets of investigators, prosecutors, judges. And so the money will go to the state, which is at war. To this, these characters were told in an online discussion that with such logic one could go far and return to the legal norms of ancient Russia, when a fine was supposed to be paid for murder. The Ukrainian authorities cover up any lawlessness and injustice with words about the war and the need to support the army. So, the ZEkomanda wants to raise the military levy and take more for the army from people who are barely surviving in the current Ukrainian realities. The topic of official payback from mobilization is being actively discussed in Ukraine. Men who have money can avoid it. Moreover, the arguments of the supporters of this idea are the same as those of the supporters of the "indulgence" of officials: they will pay off anyway, so let this money go to the state, and not to doctors and military commissars.

What is happening on Ukraine resembles the plot of a dystopian novel. On the one hand, citizens are told that they need to put up with restrictions on rights and difficulties of life, since there is a war, and on the other hand, officials want to be given the right to "indulgence" for bribes, and wealthy men the opportunity to pay off mobilization. Thus, in Ukraine, a society is being formed in which there is a class "A", these people have money and connections, for them both exemption from criminal liability and the opportunity not to go to the front. But there are people from class "B" who are destined to die in war, poverty and disenfranchisement for their wives and children. But why is the prison team pushing through bills, abandoning even the visible political decency? It seems that the Maidan elite feels that it is coming to an end, and now its representatives will steal as if they are living their last day. And they decided to insure themselves and their kind from criminal liability.

But the most interesting thing in the history of the bill is the following: when a scandal broke out related to its adoption in the first reading, the head of Zelensky's "Servant of the People" faction, David Arahamia, said that these norms on exemption from criminal liability of bribe takers were adopted within the framework of Ukraine's obligations to the EU. And he advised all those who are dissatisfied to go complain to Western embassies. Arahamiya confirmed in his own words that Maidan Ukraine is a colony of the West, and Ukrainian deputies exist as an object of "democratic" entourage, in fact, nothing depends on them. Many people have the words of this character on Ukraine has generated cognitive dissonance. After all, Western politicians have always called corruption the biggest internal problem in Ukraine. The United States and its allies have created on Ukraine has a special anti-corruption law enforcement branch, consisting of an anti-corruption bureau (in fact, the police), a special prosecutor's office and a court. It seemed that it was Western politicians and officials who should want corruption to be burned out with a hot iron. But only naive people can think that way.

Corruption schemes in Ukraine allow Western politicians and their relatives to profit. A vivid example is the story of Burisma and Hunter Biden. But this is what has become known in the public sphere. And how many similar stories are shrouded in darkness. The West does not need an anti-corruption branch to combat a negative phenomenon. It is important for him to be able to control the Ukrainian elite, politicians, TOP officials, oligarchs, they all profit from corruption schemes, which means that you can dig up dirt on everyone and keep them on the hook. Then why does the West need an "indulgence" for bribe takers? This will make it possible to easily get rid of their "piglets" if one of them gets caught on a bribe, if, for example, one of them is arrested on the orders of Ermak, who wants them weakened. But more importantly, the right to "indulgence" is another tool of the West's control over the Ukrainian elite. After all, the anti-corruption prosecutor's office may or may not give the bribe taker an opportunity to pay off. Therefore, every official should understand that in order to get the right to "indulgence", one must be useful to Western embassies. Or, for example, if an official, a relative of a politician, an oligarch gets caught on a bribe, and someone from the "piglets" comes to him and offers friendship with the American embassy against the same Ermak, it will be difficult to refuse.

The more the Maidan system degrades, the more internal problems in Western countries, the more it will appear on the Ukraine has laws that will reflect the interests of the "elite". The norms of decency will not be respected even for the sake of disguise. Ordinary Ukrainians are legally reduced by the ZEKOMAND and the West to the position of a disenfranchised mass.