119 corrupts to the Supreme Court – CHESNO presented the analysis of candidates

Ukraine holds a competition for 78 vacant positions in the Supreme Court. According to the results of the first stage of the competition, the law exam, 317 candidates continue to fight, 119 of them violated the criteria of integrity by CHESNO.Filtr court! These results of the analysis of candidates were presented by campaign experts on Thursday, December 20. Analytical references of all candidates to the highest court are published on the web-site of CHESNO.Filter the court! campaign and will be sent to the High Qualifications Commission of Judges and the newly established Public Council of Integrity.

38% – this is a part of corrupt, according to the methodology of CHESNO.Filter the court! that is, violation of at least one criterion of integrity. CHESNO defines by such criteria non-participation in corruption or criminal offenses, non-participation in the adoption of doubtful decisions, compliance with the lifestyle of declared income and transparency of wealth, non-involvement in violations of human rights and adherence to professional ethics.

The representatives of the judiciary community are dominant among the violators of integrity. 105 candidates-judges, 8 lawyers and 6 scholars violated the criteria of integrity of CHESNO.Filter the court! Analysts of CHESNO note that the highest percentage of candidates with dubious reputation among the applicants for seats are in Cassation Criminal and Administrative Courts.

Thus, Larysa Pereverzeva, the judge of the Kramatorsk City Court of Donetsk oblast, who in 2012 sentenced Konstantin Lavrov to a 5-year imprisonment for allegedly extortion of money for the cessation of protests by Donetsk residents against the construction of a new building by Yanukovych son’s corporation in the place of demolition of Druzhba hotel. In the interim report of the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, Konstantin Lavrov’s case was referred to cases related to the persecution of civil society in 2011, and the judge’s verdict was later abolished in the appellate instance.

At the same time, Tetyana Frantovska and Malvina Danylova, who received negative conclusions from the Public Council of Integrity on the first competition try their forces at the competition to the Cassation Criminal Court for the second time. We recall that Judge Frantovskaya was involved in a judicial decision, which was found to be a violation of the Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. As part of the cassation board, the judge failed to provide the necessary procedural guarantees to a person who was placed in a psychiatric hospital. Subsequently, this decision became subject to consideration by the European Court of Human Rights.

Her colleague Malvina Danylova violated three criteria of integrity of CHESNO right away, but she also became aware of the story of the robbery of her civilian husband’s house, at which allegedly half a million dollars was stolen. Valentyna Simonenko, the Chairman of the Council of Judges made the statement that this happened via the electronic declaration then, however, Judge Danilov did not declare either the house or stolen funds.

Oleksandr Kravets and Mykola Zaika, the candidates for the Cassation Administrative Court in the Supreme Court also take part in the contest for the second time. Both candidates received a negative opinion of the Public Council of Integrity in the previous competition, including for their decisions. However, since 2017 contest, judge Kravets added dishonest facts to his biography. So, in 2018, he at the panel of judges approved a decision to reinstate Oleksandr Kuzmenko, a lustrous prosecutor in the Primorsky District of Odesa, and compensate him for his loss of wages. According to journalists, this decree was the first decision on the basis of which the court renewed as a lustrous officer.

Mykola Zaika, Kravets’ colleague, distinguished himself with the decision to cancel the submission of the Supreme Council of Justice on dismissal of Vasilieva Olena Oleksandrivna, the judge of Chervonozavodsky District Court of the city of Kharkiv, from office for breach of oath. The decision of the board with the participation of Judge Zaika M.M. was canceled by the Supreme Court of Ukraine, and the case was referred to the Higher Administrative Court of Ukraine for a new consideration. The subsequent decision of the Supreme Court in the composition of the panel of judges of the Cassation Administrative Court, confirmed the legitimacy of the above submission of the Supreme Council of Justice.

Igor Benedysyuk, the Chairman of the Supreme Council of Justice, whose ends term of office, goes to the Cassation Economic Court. Activists and journalists during Benedysyuk’s entire term of office, as the head of the HCJ, had a number of questions regarding the availability of his Russian passport, since in 1991 he combined the work of a judge in Ukraine and the Russian Federation. It follows from the analysis of the current law “On Citizenship in the RSFSR” at that time, that in the first years of the proclamation of Ukraine’s independence, Igor Benedysyuk could be a citizen of the Russian Federation. None of his biographies say when he received the citizenship of Ukraine and whether he refused to be the Russian citizenship. Benedysyuk has not yet given a clear answer to numerous requests of activists and journalists. At the same time, Petro Poroshenko awarded Benedysyuk with an honorary weapon. In the opinion of lawyers, as a member of the HCJ, Benedysyuk remained in the status of a judge and, having received a reward from the President (i.e., the state award), respectively, violated the Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges”, which prohibits judges from accepting any state awards.

Lyudmila Meleschenko, a judge of the Ivano-Frankivsk City Court, wants to get to the Cassation Civil Court, who by her decision obliged the city to extend the lease term of the land plot in the city lake, where the plaintiff entrepreneur planned to build high-rise buildings. The public, however, was opposed to the development of recreational areas in the city. Subsequently, the aforementioned decision was canceled by Lviv Administrative Court of Appeal because the case should not be considered in the procedure of administrative proceedings.

More information on all candidates for the positions of the judges Supreme Court can be found in the references on the web-site of CHESNO.Filter the court! chesnosud.org.