The Kyiv District Court of Odesa refused to grant another motion by the defense to recuse the presiding judge in the case concerning medical negligence by Odrex doctors. After this, the court proceeded to hear the case on its merits in a closed session and heard the opening statements of the parties, writes UNN.
Another court hearing took place in the Kyiv District Court of Odesa in the criminal case against doctors of the private clinic Odrex, Vitalii Rusakov and Maryna Bielotserkovska, who are accused under Part 1 of Article 140 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine – improper performance of professional duties by a medical worker. During the open part of the hearing, the defense again filed a motion to recuse the presiding judge. The prosecutor and representatives of the injured party objected, and the court refused to grant the motion.
After the open part concluded, the court moved to a closed court session, where it began the direct examination of the criminal case on its merits. During this stage, as a rule, the indictment is announced, the opening statements of the parties are heard, and the order for further examination of evidence is determined.
The next court hearing is scheduled for July 10. We can conclude that the court has effectively moved to a more intensive hearing schedule after the completion of the preparatory stage of the proceedings.
The criminal case against doctors of the private clinic Odrex has been heard in court for over seven months. During this time, the proceedings have been repeatedly postponed due to procedural motions by the defense. In particular, the lawyers for the accused filed motions to recuse judges, initiated a change of jurisdiction, petitioned for the return of the indictment to the prosecutor, and individual court hearings were rescheduled due to the absence of defense lawyers and other procedural circumstances. As a result, after the case was transferred from the Prymorskyi District Court to the Kyiv District Court of Odesa, the preparatory proceedings had to be conducted anew.
Lawyers interviewed by UNN did not rule out that the combination of such procedural actions could be a tactic by the defense aimed at closing the case due to the statute of limitations.
President of the All-Ukrainian Association of Retired Judges Denys Neviadomskyi emphasizes that the court must respond to cases of possible abuse of procedural rights. The CEO of the law firm "Bolinsky and Team" Sviatoslav Bolinsky holds a similar opinion. According to him, numerous postponements of hearings, motions for recusal, changes in the composition of the court, and other procedural steps may be elements of a defense strategy. At the same time, only the court can provide a final assessment of the procedural behavior of the participants in the proceedings and their motives.