The article raises the problem of finding a balance between strengthening anticorruption control and preserving the institutional independence of the bar in Ukraine within the framework of the NACP’s proposals for the draft Anti-Corruption Strategy for 2026–2030. The relevance of the study of the selected issue is due to the spread of anti-corruption policy to the field of the bar as an independent constitutional institution of civil society and the risks associated with the transformation of anti-corruption mechanisms into means of institutional pressure, as this may negatively affect the guarantees of the right to legal aid and a fair trial. The purpose of the article is to analyze and evaluate the NACP’s proposals for the draft AntiCorruption Strategy for 2026–2030 from the point of view of ensuring a balance between effective anti-corruption control and preserving the institutional independence of the bar, as well as identifying risks and ways to minimize them. In the process of the study, general scientific and special-legal methods of cognition were applied, in particular formal-legal, systemic, comparative-legal, which made it possible to investigate the correlation of the norms of national legislation, provisions of the Constitution, international and European standards of independence of the bar, as well as the approaches of the NACP to the formation of anti-corruption policy.

As a result of the study, it was established that the provisions proposed by the NACP in the field of advocacy and the provision of legal aid contain a number of debatable aspects related to the expansion of state control, in particular in the field of disciplinary liability, access to the profession, financial transparency and the organization of advocate self-government. It is substantiated that such approaches may lead to a violation of the principles of proportionality, legal certainty and independence of the bar, guaranteed by the Constitution and international regulatory documents. The conclusions emphasize that the Anti-Corruption Strategy, in the part that concerns the bar, should serve as a framework program document that defines general alternative guidelines without direct interference in the activities of the bar. Ensuring a real balance between the public interest in combating corruption and guarantees of the independence of legal practice should be strengthened by adhering to the principles of transparency of disciplinary procedures and involving independent, including international, expert control.

Journal articles

1. Ivanov O, ‘Pryntsypy diialnosti natsionalnoho ahentstva z pytan zapobihannia koruptsii’ [2019] 5 Pidpryiemnytstvo, hospodarstvo i pravo 142–146 https://doi.org/10.32849/2663- 5313/2019.5.25 (in Ukrainian).

2. Starovoit M, ‘Teoretychni zasady uchasti advokata u formuvanni antykoruptsiinoi polityky v ekonomichnii sferi’ [2025] 16 Problemy suchasnykh transformatsii https://doi. org/10.54929/2786-5746-2025-16-01-03 (in Ukrainian).

3. Tsekhan D, Biloshkurskyi M, ‘Prytiahnennia advokativ do vidpovidalnosti za koruptsiini pravoporushennia: problemy zakonodavstva ta protsesualnykh aspektiv’ [2025] 36 Yurydychnyi biuleten 108–116 https://doi.org/10.32850/LB2414-4207.2025.36.13 (in Ukrainian).

Newspaper articles

4. Kim V, ‘Advokatura: chy mozhe antykoruptsiina stratehiia rozrubaty hordiiv vuzol’ (16 sichnia, 2026) (accessed 27.03.2026) (in Ukrainian).

5. Yakusha V, ‘Antykoruptsiina vertykal ne mozhe «opikuvatysia» advokaturoiu yak instytutom, – t.v.o. holovy VKDKA’ (Zakon i Biznes 29.12.25) (accessed 27.03.2026) (in Ukrainian). Conference papers

6. Baran A, ‘Rol advokatury u zapobihanni koruptsii’, Advokatura: mynule, suchasnist ta maibutnie: materialy XII Mizhnar. nauk.-prakt. konf. (N Bakaianova (hol redkol), Feniks 2022) 104–107 (in Ukrainian).