US, EU and NATO experts praise SBU law draft, but there's one remark
The International Advisory Group (IAG), established by the United States, the European Union, and NATO, issued a positive opinion on the latest version of the draft law on the Security Service of Ukraine.
IAG's conclusion, prepared at the request of the head of the working group for reform development, Mariana Bezuhla, was published on the EP website.
The working group, first, emphasized the overall support for the draft's final version, noting that "this draft can serve as a solid basis for a radical reform of the SBU under European and Euro-Atlantic principles and best practices."
However, IAG's extensive positive opinion contains one remark: Western experts strongly recommend that Ukraine change the current wording of Article 8-2 of the Law on Counterintelligence (this law is also being amended as part of the reform), which allows it to use data collected by the SBU counterintelligence during covert surveillance activities in court as evidence in criminal proceedings.
"The use of counterintelligence data in court creates several serious challenges… In general, the threshold and legal requirements for gathering evidence in a criminal case for use in court are higher, given a completely different task: evidence is collected against a person and intelligence is collected for the state. The aspect is that counterintelligence data for use in court is often classified. This affects a person's right to a fair trial, as clients and their lawyers may not have access to such data to properly prepare a line of defense," IAG's recommendations say.
International experts note that if the project is approved in its current form, there's "concern about the risk of misuse of counterintelligence information for political and corrupt purposes." "IAG recommends that the draft law clearly limit the use of such materials only in the most serious criminal offenses and clearly prescribe the procedure for using intelligence as evidence in court," the analysis provided by Ukraine's partners reads.
At the same time, for all other positions, IAG provided positive feedback, supporting the key changes proposed in the draft.
In particular, explanations from NATO, EU, and US experts answer the question of why it's important to completely deprive the SBU of the function of pre-trial investigation, whether the SBU should retain the right to investigate national security, why the SBU should not engage in economic crimes, smuggling or corruption, and also why it's advisable to reduce the staff of the SBU during the unprecedented hybrid war of the Russian Federation against Ukraine.
