On September 23, half a year has passed since the beginning of the interviews (the first interview took place on…
Six months of evaluation of Ukrainian judges. Analysis by CHESNO. Filter the Judiciary!
On September 23, half a year has passed since the beginning of the interviews (the first interview took place on March 23) with the judges as part of the qualification assessment of judges by the High Judicial Qualifications Commission.
CHESNO. Filter the Judiciary! has analyzed the results of interviews and judges, which for half a year – from March 23 to September 28 – were interviewed as part of the qualification assessment, on several parameters. In total, over 2,000 judges have been interviewed during this period. Of them, 3/4 judges confirmed the ability to administer justice in the relevant court.
CHESNO. Filter the Judiciary! already prepared the material for the period of the first month of qualification assessment. You can find it here.
According to HJQC, 106 judges are recognized as unqualified to the position held. A break was announced for 243. The qualification assessment procedure was terminated for 12. The qualification assessment procedure was stopped for 99 judges. For some of the judges, consideration of the issue of compliance with the position held was postponed.
Also, the database of judge profiles of CHESNO. Filter the Judiciary! has information about the part of the judges who passed qualification. CHESNO. Filter the Judiciary! divided the judges in three categories: judges who qualify, but there are unscrupulous ones according to the CHESNO. Filter the Judiciary! methodology. The judges who did not qualify and were considered disingenuous; disingenuous judges, in respect of which the qualification assessment was stopped.
So, the judges who have passed qualification, but are disingenuous.
For example, Borovytskyi Oleksandr Andriyovych, the Maidan judge. He issued an order prohibiting civic organization Front Zmin, all-Ukrainian association Batkivshchyna and UDAR to set up tents in the central part of the city of Chernivtsy in the period from 23/11/2013 to 01/12/2013. And then, he failed to indicate this fact in the declaration of virtue. He also did not indicate any real estate in which he lived in 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016, although he he was obliged to do it. The judge was qualified.
Zvarych Oksana Vladimirovna, the wife of the bribetaker judge Zvarych. As indicated in the material on the Gazeta.ua website with reference to a source in the General Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine, during the investigation, a graphological examination was allegedly carried out, which confirmed the investigation’s assumptions that the notes in the notebook, in which the amounts of bribes recorded were taken administrative court appeal, led by Ihor Zvarych’s wife. The judge was qualified.
Judge Presniakova Anzhelika Anatoliyivna was on the panel of judges, who left the sentence of the Primorsky District Court of Mariupol unchanged, condemning the Ukrainian border guard Serhii Kolmogorov, who was accused of allegedly firing on a checkpoint near Mariupol at a car that did not stop on demand border guards. Subsequently, this decision was overturned by the High Specialized Court of Ukraine for the consideration of civil and criminal cases due to significant violations of the requirements of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine, as well as the incorrect application of the criminal law on criminal liability.
Also, judge Presniakova as a member of the college of judges made the decision, which left the decision of the Oktyabrsky district court of Mariupol on refusing to continue the term of detention of Volodymyr Nesterenko, suspected of collaborating with the so called Donetsk People’s Republic, after which Nestenko disappeared.
And her husband bought a car as early as in 2006, but in the declarations of the judge for 2013, 2014 and 2016 there is no information about this property. The judge was qualified.
Gutsal Mikhailo Ihorovych. The judge was accused of allegedly receiving undue benefits. Thus, the materials of the pre-trial investigation stated that the probable accomplice of judge Gutsal, the lawyer, offered a private company Boomerang to assist the Kharkov Appeal Administrative Court of a complaint filed by the Kremenchuck Tax and State Treasury on the case won by the company about cancellation of tax liabilities in the amount exceeding one million hryvnia. However, the judge was later acquitted, and the lawyer was found guilty of fraud. The judge was qualified.
Judge Bovkun Eduard Mykhailovych, according to Tyzhden, the judge was accused of allegedly receiving a bribe from a citizen of Ukraine for the decision not to confiscate property. After the investigation of these circumstances, the Boryspil District Court of the Kyiv Region decided to send the criminal case to the prosecutor of Kyiv to conduct an additional investigation on the grounds of incompleteness and incorrectness of the pretrial investigation. He also did not indicate the property in which he lived in 2014, although he he was obliged to do it. The judge was qualified.
Also let’s recall a few dishonest judges who did not qualify.
Sanin Bohdan Volodymyrovych, a judge famous for his odiousness. It was he who, on November 30, made a decision that he forbade an unlimited circle of people to hold events or rallies on Maidan Nezalezhnosti, Evropeiska Ploshcha, Bankova, Grushevskoho, Bogomolets from December 1, 2013 to January 7, 2014. According to Ukrainska Pravda, the decision of judge Sanin became the formal basis for further attempts by the Berkut to clean the Maidan and the surrounding territories from the protesters.
Also, Sanin “forgot” to indicate in the declaration of 2014 having the right of common ownership of an apartment of 177 sq. m. in the city of Dnipro.
Journalists of the program “Our money. Where the judgments lead” draw attention to the dubious circumstances of the purchase of the Beneteau OC 37 yacht by Sanin’s wife. In particular, as noted in the program, the market value of the yacht is about 100 thousand dollars or 1 million UAH at the 2014 rate, but in the declaration Bohdan Sanin states that his wife managed to purchase this yacht twice cheaper than the market value for 460 thousand UAH. The judge did not qualify.
Zuieva Larysa Evhenivna. Thanks to the decision of the jury, which included Zuieva, a company KOMETA-M continued the construction of a housing and hotel complex on the Black Sea coast, despite the legislative ban on construction in recreational areas.
Also, according to the PROSUD portal. after approximate estimates of journalists, the total value of Larysa Zuieva’s net worth is about 25 million UAH, besides, the judge keeps the equivalent of 5 million UAH in cash. However, this amount exceeds the one declared by the judge of income. The judge did not qualify.
Malichenko Vasyl Volodymyrovych. According to the Public Council of Virtue, Judge Malichenko, in the premises of Orzhytsia District Court, kicked the applicant in the upper back of his right leg and tried to detain him. Also, according to the PCV, in 2010-2011, the judge allegedly used non-residential premises, the court deliberation room for his own residence. Therefore, according to PCV, he used his official position for personal interests, although he did not stated this in the declaration of virtue.
Judge Malichenko, being part of the collegium, passed a ruling that annulled the decision of the Kriukiv District Court of Kremenchug to extend the detention of Valerii Pavlyshyn, which was dismissed in the courtroom. Valerii Pavlyshyn is suspected of a possible organization of a criminal gang that allegedly demanded money from a resident of Poltava, threatening him and his family members with violence. According to the testimony of one of the victims, Valerii Pavlyshyn seemed to continue his bullying after his release from custody.
Also, there are a lot of inconsistencies in the property declarations of the judge for 2015 and 2016. The judge did not qualify.
We also add a complete list of dishonest judges that are available in the database of judge profiles CHESNO. Filter the Judiciary! and who were interviewed.