BCU: NACP initiatives regarding advocacy are unconstitutional interference

The Bar Council of Ukraine has condemned the initiatives to reform the advocacy proposed by the National Agency for Corruption Prevention as direct, gross, and systematic interference by the executive branch in the activities of an independent constitutional institution.

The BCU approved a corresponding open statement on the unconstitutional attempts to nationalize the advocacy and the NACP's interference in the activities of the self-governing professional community during an extraordinary meeting on December 31.

We would like to remind you that the day before, the NACP held an event entitled «Public discussion of the draft Anti-Corruption Strategy for 2026-2030 in relation to advocacy».

Among other things, a representative of the NACP made a statement that, allegedly, in accordance with the Roadmap on the Rule of Law, the state is obliged to interfere in the activities of 16 institutions, including advocacy.

However, this position is a gross misrepresentation of the content of this document. The UNBA categorically rejects this interpretation as legally flawed, manipulative, and inconsistent with the very logic of the Roadmap.

The full text of the open statement is provided below:

Appendix to the decision of the BCU

No. 158 of December 31, 2025

OPEN STATEMENT

on unconstitutional attempts to nationalize the bar association and interference by the National Agency for Corruption Prevention in the activities of the self-governing professional community

The Ukrainian National Bar Association, which represents the advocacy in accordance with the Law of Ukraine «On the advocacy and legal practice», expresses its strong protest against the actions of the National Agency for Corruption Prevention (NACP) that took place on December 30, 2025 during the organization and conduct of the so-called «public discussion» of the draft Anti-Corruption Strategy for 2026-2030 in the part concerning advocacy.

The Ukrainian National Bar Association considers this event and the initiatives proposed within its framework to be a direct, gross, and systematic interference by the executive branch in the activities of the independent constitutional institution of advocacy, which is contrary to the Constitution of Ukraine, the principle of the rule of law, and international standards for the protection of the advocate profession. Such actions pose a real threat to the self-governing nature of advocacy, narrowing the guarantees of its independence and, as a result, violating the right of every person to effective and independent professional legal assistance.

The statement by the NACP representative that, according to the Roadmap on the rule of law, the state is obliged to interfere in the activities of 16 institutions, which unjustifiably include advocacy, is a gross misrepresentation of the content of this document. The Ukrainian National Bar Association categorically rejects this interpretation as legally flawed, manipulative, and incompatible with the very logic of the Roadmap, which does not provide for any state interference in the activities of the independent constitutional institution of advocacy.

First, the Roadmap is not a direct action act and does not empower any state authority to interfere in the activities of independent constitutional institutions. It is a framework policy document aimed at harmonising reforms with European standards, rather than expanding the powers of executive bodies beyond the Constitution and laws of Ukraine.

Secondly, the assertion of «state interference» in the activities of advocacy directly contradicts the content of the section of the Roadmap devoted to advocacy, which, on the contrary, is based on the need to preserve and strengthen its independence, developing self-government, accountability to the professional community, and the evolutionary improvement of existing mechanisms, rather than their dismantling or replacement by state control.

Thirdly, the NACP's position demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the limits of state power and the nature of advocacy as a constitutional institution.

Identifying advocacy with institutions over which the state can exercise regulatory or administrative influence is categorically unacceptable. According to Article 131-2 of the Constitution of Ukraine, advocacy is an independent constitutional institution, not a subject of public administration or an object of state policy of the executive branch.

The reference by NACP representatives to the Roadmap on the rule of law, approved by the Order of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 475-r of May 14, 2025, «Certain issues of ensuring the negotiation process on Ukraine's accession to the European Union under cluster 1 «Fundamentals of the EU accession process», as an alleged basis for «state interference» in the activities of advocacy, is a deliberate distortion of the content of this document. The Roadmap is of a framework and programmatic nature, is not a direct action act, and cannot change the constitutional status of advocacy, expand the powers of executive authorities, or legitimize state interference in the self-government of advocacy.

No strategy, roadmap, or other government document can abolish or limit the constitutional guarantee of the independence of advocacy. Attempts by the National Agency for Corruption Prevention, beyond its own legally defined discretion, to impose its own vision of legislative changes on advocacy indicate a search for «influential entities» beyond its powers and are unconstitutional in nature. Such actions pose a direct threat to the independence of advocacy and the right of every person to effective and independent professional legal assistance.

The UNBA considers these actions to be an attempt to illegally expand the NACP's sphere of influence at the expense of the constitutional institution of advocacy.

Fourth, the NACP's interpretation of the Roadmap effectively replaces the concept of «state policy in the field of the rule of law» with the concept of «administrative control over the profession of advocate», which directly contradicts European standards, in particular PACE Recommendation No. 21 (1995), Recommendation R(2000)21 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, and the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of the Legal Profession (2025).

In this context, the NACP representative's statement about «the state's obligation to interfere in the activities of advocacy» is not only legally unfounded but also dangerous, as it legitimizes an attempt to undermine the independence of advocacy under the guise of a strategic document, which in its content and purpose does not provide for any such interference.

The Ukrainian National Bar Association considers this position of the NACP to be a deliberate substitution of legal logic with arbitrary administrative discretion and an attempt to illegally expand its powers as an executive body, which will inevitably have systemic negative consequences for the right to a fair trial, the right to defense, and trust in justice in Ukraine.

According to Article 131-2 of the Constitution of Ukraine, advocacy is an independent constitutional institution, and any statements about the «duty of the state to interfere» in its activities are unconstitutional in nature and incompatible with the European standards of the Council of Europe and the principles of the UN regarding the role of advocates.

The NACP, as a central executive body with special status, is authorized by the Law of Ukraine «On prevention of corruption» to formulate and implement state anti-corruption policy within the limits defined by law. At the same time, the NACP does not have constitutional or legislative discretion to formulate, initiate, or model state policy in the field of advocacy and bar self-government, which by their nature belong to independent constitutional institutions.

Attempts to impose changes on advocacy under the pretext of developing an «anti-corruption strategy», in particular regarding the procedure for access to the profession, the organization of bar self-government bodies, disciplinary procedures, or financial mechanisms for their activities, indicate that the NACP has exceeded its powers as directly defined by law.

Taken together, this indicates an attempt to replace independent bar self-government with elements of state administrative control. This approach directly contradicts Article 131-2 of the Constitution of Ukraine, which guarantees the independence of advocacy, as well as the European standards of the Council of Europe and the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.

The scheduling of discussions on issues directly related to advocacy and justice on the penultimate day of the year, as well as the deliberate selection of participants without adequate professional representation of advocacy, indicate a conscious desire to imitate dialogue instead of conducting real consultations with the professional community.

The Ukrainian National Bar Association is forced to note that this is not an isolated case, but a deliberate and intentional substitution of advocacy representation, which is systematically repeated with the participation of the same individuals at several public events organized with the participation of state institutions. This is not a coincidence, but a systematic and deliberate substitution of the representation of advocacy, where the real professional community of over 70,000 advocates is deliberately replaced by a few of the same individuals without any mandate, who are artificially positioned as «experts in advocacy».

At the same time, the level of so-called «expertise» of these individuals is extremely low, and the only reason for their systematic presence at such events is their involvement in foreign grant programs, rather than professional experience, the trust of the legal community, or participation in bar self-government bodies.

In fact, this is a deliberate institutional manipulation, whereby the formation of an artificially selected group of «speakers», which is systematically used at various events, creates a false narrative about the position of advocacy, which has no representative or professional basis. Such a narrative does not reflect the will and position of a professional community of over 70,000 advocates, but is the result of a deliberate substitution of advocacy by a limited circle of individuals who lack a mandate and the necessary professional competence.

We would like to draw particular attention to the lack of transparency in the formation of the so-called «experts» and the obvious risks of collusion between individuals involved by the NACP in the preparation and public presentation of proposals concerning advocacy. An analysis of the personal composition of the «pseudo-experts» reveals the existence of strong ties between individual participants and organizations in the grant sector, which could not and should not have been overlooked by the NACP as the body responsible by law for preventing and resolving conflicts of interest.

According to information from open sources and public professional profiles, some of the individuals involved by the NACP in «expert» work are associated with the Ukrainian Bar Association (UBA) and the NGO «Advocate of the future», in particular through participation in joint projects and programs implemented with donor (grant) support. We would like to draw your attention to the fact that publicly available information also indicates that there are overlaps between certain participants in these initiatives and individuals who have been associated with the NACP in the past. This objectively calls into question the impartiality of the formation of the pool of individuals whom the NACP positions as «experts on advocacy issues».

During the «public discussion» organized by the NACP, after questions were asked about the composition of the experts and the criteria for their selection, the public did not receive a transparent answer on the merits; instead, there were calls to refrain from commenting on this issue. Such behavior is incompatible with the principles of openness and accountability declared by the NACP and only reinforces doubts about the real motives behind the formation of the «expert» panel.

Moreover, the actions taken to select this group of individuals show signs of a potential conflict of interest, which is particularly dangerous precisely because the NACP is a body that has the legal authority to provide explanations and set standards in the field of conflict of interest prevention. In this regard, the UNBA publicly raises a fundamental question: who will ensure the identification and proper resolution of conflicts of interest in the actions of NACP officials themselves, and how, if such risks arise in processes initiated and organized by the NACP?

Furthermore, the proposals systematically promoted by the speakers involved are neither new nor anti-corruption.

The course of the so-called «discussion» on December 30 demonstrated a profound degradation of ethical standards on the part of the event organizers. Particular outrage was caused by the publicly voiced proposal of one of the NACP representatives to allow the use of profanity as an allegedly acceptable tool for exercising freedom of speech and thought.

Tolerance of profanity by official representatives of the NACP during a public event of a state body is categorically unacceptable. Such statements and approaches have nothing to do with freedom of speech or the standards of a democratic society, and only demonstrate the level of the so-called «new standards» that are being imposed on the advocate profession — a profession based on high ethical, intellectual, and professional principles.

The tolerance of profanity by official representatives of the NACP during a public event is unacceptable and demonstrates not freedom of speech, but the devaluation of ethical standards that are being imposed on the advocate profession.

Taking into account the above circumstances and recognizing the importance of the independence of advocacy as a constitutional institution and its role in ensuring the right to a fair trial and professional legal assistance, the Ukrainian National Bar Association states that the results of the so-called «public discussion» held by the National Agency for Corruption Prevention on December 30, 2025, in section 2.3 «On the advocacy and legal practice», have no legal consequences, as they were obtained in gross violation of the principles of representation of advocacy and without proper consultation with the only representative of the professional community defined by law.

The UNBA insists that the section concerning the advocacy and bar self-government cannot be part of the Anti-Corruption Strategy for 2026-2030 and should be excluded from the draft as it was prepared outside the powers of the NACP, in violation of the Constitution of Ukraine and international standards of advocacy independence.

In connection with the above, the Ukrainian National Bar Association appeals to the President of Ukraine, as the guarantor of compliance with the Constitution of Ukraine, to pay attention to the facts of interference by the executive branch in the activities of the independent constitutional institution of advocacy and to take the measures provided for by the Constitution to ensure the guarantees of its independence, enshrined in Article 131-2 of the Constitution of Ukraine.

The Ukrainian National Bar Association also appeals to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine to refrain from approving the Anti-Corruption Strategy for 2026-2030 in the part concerning advocacy and bar self-government,

as the relevant provisions have been drafted in violation of the Constitution of Ukraine, beyond the powers of the NACP, and without proper consultation with the only defined by law representative of advocacy.

The UNBA emphasizes that no strategic or program documents can legitimize state interference in the self-governing and independent advocacy, and ignoring these reservations creates direct risks of violating the right to a fair trial and the right to professional legal assistance.

The Ukrainian National Bar Association appeals to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine to provide an appropriate legal and institutional assessment of the actions of the National Agency for Corruption Prevention and to take into account the position outlined above during the further consideration and approval of strategic documents of the state.

At the same time, the UNBA appeals to international institutions, in particular the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE), the Council of Europe, relevant bodies of the United Nations, as well as other international partners of Ukraine, to inform them about systematic attempts by certain state institutions to interfere with the independence of advocacy and to replace proper consultations with manipulative practices.

The Ukrainian National Bar Association confirms its openness to constructive, professional, and good-faith dialogue with state authorities, provided that the Constitution of Ukraine, the principle of the rule of law, and international standards for the protection of the advocate profession are unconditionally observed, while reserving the right to use all national and international mechanisms to protect the independence of advocacy and human rights in Ukraine.