Ukraine’s Cabinet has finally appointed the anti-corruption detective Oleksandr Tsyvinskyi as director of the Bureau of Economic Security (BEB), ending weeks of deadlock that drew international criticism and jeopardized IMF funding.

Tsyvinskyi won the official selection process earlier in July, receiving unanimous support from the commission. Yet the appointment stalled amid unsubstantiated security concerns — a delay that risked derailing up to $2.3 billion financial aid.

What made them so nervous about a detective

Tsyvinskyi represents exactly what Western donors hoped to build in Ukraine. The PhD holder spent nearly a decade at Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau, methodically building cases against untouchable figures like ex-MP Serhiy Pashynskyi, who was charged with embezzling millions in oil products.

In June, a six-member selection commission chose him unanimously, with the three international experts whose votes were decisive under Ukrainian law all supporting his candidacy. The transparent competition was designed specifically to prevent political interference.

A watchdog too effective

The Bureau of Economic Security threatens powerful interests by design. Created in 2021 to replace Ukraine’s corrupt tax police, it investigates economic crimes that intersect with business networks and political patronage.

These are precisely the cases that make politicians with business ties uncomfortable.

Officials initially leaked concerns about Tsyvinskyi’s father, a Russian citizen living in Russia. The Security Service of Ukraine demolished this excuse, with Ukrainian online newspaper Babel reporting that the SBU confirmed no legal reasons existed to block his appointment.

The double standard was obvious. Russian-born General Oleksandr Syrskyi, Ukraine’s commander-in-chief, has close relatives in Russia — yet it’s never been an issue. Tsyvinskyi, meanwhile, told reporters he hadn’t spoken to his father in over a decade.

The power play behind the scenes

The delay wasn’t random bureaucracy. It came amid broader tensions over control of anti-corruption institutions, with Andriy Yermak, head of the Office of the President (pictured), steadily expanding his influence over personnel policy. Prime Minister Yuliia Svyrydenko, his close ally, chairs the Cabinet, which refused to sign Tsyvinskyi’s appointment within the legal deadline.

The timing was suspicious. Around the same time, the government tried — and failed — to place the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office under tighter executive control. That rollback also came only after intense international pressure.

By mid-July, Ukrainian business groups warned that Tsyvinskyi’s limbo status could disrupt the agency’s reforms and create problems with international partners. Civil society groups called it a procedural violation.

Tsyvinskyi abandoned his reserved professional stance and went public, accusing officials of using “manipulative” tactics to sabotage his candidacy.

When $2.3 billion talks, politicians listen

While Ukraine’s Cabinet dodged questions, pressure from international donors ultimately forced the appointment.
The International Monetary Fund and European Commission had backed the competitive selection process as a core pillar of Ukraine’s anti-corruption reforms. With billions in aid flowing through government systems, donor trust became a concrete factor in political calculations.

Ukraine’s IMF deal includes $2.3 billion in aid this year — but only if Kyiv meets its structural reform milestones.

According to the Kyiv Independent, Western donors viewed the delay as a test of Kyiv’s credibility, with direct implications for financial support. More than 60 civil society organizations and business groups issued open letters demanding Tsyvinskyi’s appointment.

The message was clear by late July: continued obstruction could jeopardize that support. The government began signaling that Tsyvinskyi might be appointed in early August, after he agreed to take a polygraph test.

Tsyvinskyi passed the test on 5 August. Of course, he did — the whole exercise was face-saving theater. The mounting pressure had worked.

The pattern: blocking qualified candidates

The Ukrainian government takes an unusual step amid EU pressure. Facing the threat of losing billions in aid, Ukrainian Prime Minister Yuliia Svyrydenko has announced that Oleksandr Tsyvinsky, the selected candidate for Director of the Bureau of Economic Security (BEB), has agreed he will undergo a polygraph test.

Svyrydenko: “A civilized solution is the polygraph”

The Ukrainian prime minister says she has held a direct meeting with Tsyvinsky on 1 August, during which they agreed he would take a polygraph test. 

“We agreed with Oleksandr on how to remove all doubts in a civilized manner and arranged for him to take a polygraph test. This guarantees that the situation is free of manipulation and allows us to move forward,” Svyrydenko states. 

She adds that the selection commission has already made its decision and that the government has received the results from additional background checks.

Tsyvinsky is a National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) detective who won the BEB director position in June 2025. The competition involved international experts. Tsyvinsky leads one of NABU’s elite detective units. His appointment was to symbolize the restoration of trust in anti-corruption bodies. 

However, on 7 July, the Ukrainian government refused to approve him, citing “security concerns” as assessed by the Security Service. In response, Tsyvinsky stated that the government’s decision “does not comply with the law.”

Government promises final decision next week

The prime minister emphasizes the shared interest in making the Bureau of Economic Security an effective institution trusted by both business and the public. She expresses hope that the Ukrainian government will reach a final decision next week. 

“This will be a major contribution to rebuilding trust between the state and the business community,” Svyrydenko adds. 

The government’s refusal to approve the competition winner marked another escalation in tense relations between Ukrainian authorities and NABU, which sharply intensified this summer.

On 22 July, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy signed the controversial bill, which curtails the NABU’s independence, as well as the liberty of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), by requiring their key decisions to be coordinated with the Prosecutor General’s Office.

The law led to mass civil society protests and criticism from international partners as it contradicts Ukraine’s commitments to the EU and the US on anti-corruption reforms.

Ukraine will receive only part of the fourth tranche of financial assistance under the Ukraine Facility mechanism. The reason is the failure to implement three out of sixteen key reforms stipulated in agreements with the EU, says Guillaume Mercier, European Commission spokesperson, European Pravda reports. 

If Kyiv had implemented all 16 reforms, Ukraine would have received €4.5 billion. But according to Mercier, the European Commission assessed only 13 indicators as fulfilled, and therefore proposes a reduced tranche of €3.05 billion.

Which reforms were not implemented?

The three reforms that remain unfulfilled are:

• decentralization
• reform of ARMA (Asset Recovery and Management Agency),
• transparent selection of judges for the High Anti-Corruption Court.

Ukraine submitted a request to the EU for a partial payment back in June 2025.

The Ukraine Facility program envisions providing Ukraine with up to €50 billion over several years, conditional on the successful implementation of reforms. Each tranche is tied to specific steps. 

On 22 July, the Ukrainian Parliament passed bill No. 12414, which effectively destroys the independence of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), says the Independent Anti-Corruption Commission (NAKO). 

The NAKO emphasizes that this decision will severely undermine trust in Ukraine on the international stage. The development of anti-corruption institutions, supported by civil society and international partners since 2015, was a key condition for Ukraine’s progress towards the EU and NATO.

The liquidation of NABU’s and SAPO’s independence threatens further international aid.

The law was adopted amid high-profile searches at NABU, where security forces uncovered an FSB agent working inside the bureau who passed information to Russia.

“Yesterday we saw SBU searches that showed NABU is not perfect, and that is true, but today these searches have been used by the authorities to dismantle an independent anti-corruption investigation,” says NAKO senior researcher Tetiana Nikolaienko.

Now the Prosecutor General becomes the de facto head of SAPO prosecutors, gains full access to NABU cases, has the right to transfer them to other bodies, decides jurisdiction disputes, and signs indictments against high-ranking officials. This destroys the possibility of conducting impartial investigations according to the law.

Meanwhile, the Anti-Corruption Action Center stresses that President Zelenskyy’s signature under this law will return the country to the times of former pro-Russian President Victor Yanukovych.

“Under these conditions, NABU, SAPO, and the High Anti-Corruption Court lose all meaning as Zelenskyy-installed Prosecutor General will stop investigations against all the president’s friends,” adds NAKO.

Accordingly, there is no point in electronic asset declarations, punishment for illegal enrichment, special confiscation, or other anti-corruption reforms.

Ukraine's parliament passed a reform of the Asset Recovery and Management Agency (ARMA) on June 18, a key step toward European integration and a condition listed in the EU's Ukraine Facility plan.

The legislation passed with the support of 253 lawmakers "after months of obstructions... unblocking 600 million euros ($690 million) in EU funds," lawmaker Yaroslav Zhelezniak said.

The ARMA is Ukraine's national agency tasked with locating, recovering, and managing assets seized in criminal proceedings, namely during corruption cases.

Proposed reforms include stricter integrity and qualification standards for leadership candidates and merit-based hiring through open competitions involving civil society. They also call for independent external audits, clear deadlines for appointing asset managers, and the use of certified professionals held legally accountable for mismanagement.

The Ukraine Facility, an EU program providing Ukraine with 50 billion euros ($58 billion) in multi-year financial support contingent on reforms, set the end of March as the deadline for the ARMA's reform.

Anti-corruption experts, lawmakers, and Transparency International in Ukraine have backed the reforms, but discussions have dragged on for months since several versions of the bill were introduced in December 2024 and January.

The ARMA has long criticized the proposed legislation, arguing it had already carried out substantial and "transformative" reforms since 2023.

Transparency International reacted by saying that the ARMA's "public communication suggests that the agency’s primary concern is not the introduction of meaningful reforms, but ensuring that its current leadership can continue operating as it has."

Ukraine has embarked on extensive reforms as part of its efforts to join the EU and other Western structures, though Russia's full-scale invasion has presented fresh challenges to this effort.

Ukraine’s parliament passes bill on multiple citizenship

Ukraine’s parliament on June 18 supported a bill allowing Ukrainian citizens to hold passports of foreign countries, lawmaker Yaroslav Zhelezniak said.

The Kyiv IndependentMartin Fornusek