Illicit enrichment ruling left a gap in Ukraine's anti-graft toolkit
A Constitutional Court decision in February 2019 struck down a criminal offence introduced at the demand of the EU and the IMF.
What did it mean when Ukraine's Constitutional Court struck down the criminal penalty for illicit enrichment by officials? By 1 March 2019, the question was live in Kyiv, days after the court's ruling of 26 February.
The court declared Article 368-2 of the Criminal Code unconstitutional. That article punished officials for unlawful enrichment. It had been introduced in 2015 at the demand of the European Union, as part of visa liberalisation, and of the International Monetary Fund.
Why the ruling mattered
The provision was therefore not a purely domestic measure. It was tied to commitments made to two external partners, one of which was linked to visa-free travel and the other to IMF requirements. The court's decision removed a criminal tool created to meet those expectations.
The ruling came only four years after the offence was adopted. As of 1 March 2019, the practical consequences for Ukraine's relations with the EU and the IMF had not been set out in the reports of 26 February. What was clear was that an article introduced under outside pressure no longer stood as part of the criminal law.
