KYIV. February 3. UNN.
Serhiy Vlasenko, the defense attorney for the former Prime Minister of Ukraine, laid out legal arguments in his blog regarding the 1996 murder case of People's Deputy Yevhen Shcherban, writes
"On January 18 of this year, Yanukovych launched a political-propaganda show titled 'Accusing Yulia Tymoshenko of the Murder of Yevhen Shcherban.' It is precisely political-propaganda, because there is no jurisprudence here, and there cannot be any in principle," writes S. Vlasenko.
In his opinion, it all began a year and a half ago when First Deputy Prosecutor General "Renat Kuzmin started a 'concert tour' across Europe, giving interviews and telling European POLITICIANS at meetings that he had IRREFUTABLE evidence of Tymoshenko's guilt in Shcherban's murder. He even wrote an open letter 'to the US Congress of Senators,' in which he offered to provide this evidence to American senators."
In April 2012, S. Vlasenko recalled, Yevhen Shcherban's son Ruslan "suddenly (after 16 years of not mentioning Tymoshenko, as he had expressed completely different versions of his father's murder), hints that he knows something about Yulia Tymoshenko's involvement in this crime."
"Then, for almost a year, the 'information preparation' continued. And here is the 'apogee' — the presentation of the so-called notice of suspicion," the defense attorney wrote.
S. Vlasenko added that the propaganda component in the authorities' actions did not just end there but significantly increased, as the next day, "the Prosecutor General's Office 'leaks' a document titled 'Extract from the Notice of Suspicion' to the media. It was leaked deliberately and to several media outlets at once so that it would DEFINITELY be published."
The lawyer emphasizes that the new Criminal Procedure Code does not provide for the creation of such a document.
"Why would the prosecutor's office need such a leak if it is only conducting legal work? The answer is obvious. In any other country, such a 'leak' would be an indisputable ground to start an internal investigation, look for the culprits, etc. But why would 'Kuzmin look for Kuzmin'?" writes the defense attorney.
Furthermore, S. Vlasenko proposes to analyze the situation considering indisputable legal axioms.
Firstly, he recalls that Yu. Tymoshenko does not have to prove her innocence; on the contrary, the prosecution is obliged to irrefutably prove her guilt. Secondly, as the lawyer reminds, all doubts are interpreted in favor of the accused.
"So, the 'Extract from the Notice of Suspicion' is laid out on 17 (seventeen) pages. Of these, the charges related to the so-called 'state guarantees' are set out on 12 (twelve) pages.
The murder charges for Shcherban are on 4.5 (four and a half). As they say, 'feel the difference.' That is why they combined the two charges, because a notice of suspicion for murder on 4 pages would look even more 'comical'," the lawyer believes.
The lawyer recalls that according to the CPC, "the notice of suspicion must specify, in particular, the 'time, place of the crime, and ALL essential circumstances known at the time the notice of suspicion was drawn up.'"
"What is stated in the text of the 'notice,' specifically regarding the time of the 'commission of the crime'? The investigation operates with very original categories: 'approximately in the first half of 1996,' 'approximately in the second half of 1996,' 'approximately in the first half of 1997.' Everything concerning the 'accusation' of Yulia Tymoshenko is defined by exactly such 'time.' Is this a legal qualification of a charge? Of course not. Charges are not presented this way. I know of NO charge that would be formulated as 'one time in 1996.' This is another 'exclusive for Tymoshenko'," he writes.
According to S. Vlasenko's conclusions, it turns out that the notice of suspicion was drawn up in blatant violation of the CPC norms.
"An analysis of the notice indicates that the 'key witness' will be a person shyly hidden behind the definition 'K. — assistant to L.' — Petro Kyrychenko, an assistant to Pavlo Lazarenko. This is a person who was REPEATEDLY questioned by Ukrainian and American law enforcement officers. Including on issues related to the Shcherban murder. Being questioned on April 25-27, 2001, in San Francisco, he stated that the only thing he knew about this case was that there was a threat to Tymoshenko's life," writes S. Vlasenko.
As a reminder, Prosecutor General Viktor Pshonka stated at a briefing on January 18 that former Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko could face life imprisonment if it is proven that she ordered the murder of People's Deputy Yevhen Shcherban.
Yevhen Shcherban, a member of the executive committee of the Liberal Party and a deputy of the Verkhovna Rada, was shot dead on November 3, 1996, at the Donetsk airport upon arrival from Moscow. The perpetrators fled the scene in a car. Shcherban, his wife, and a mechanic died from their wounds. The aircraft's flight engineer died in the hospital from a gunshot wound to the neck. Law enforcement agencies ruled out a political version of the murder and pursued a criminal one as the primary lead.
In April 2003, the Luhansk Oblast Court of Appeal sentenced Shcherban's killers to life imprisonment. In particular, Vadym Bolotskykh was sentenced to life imprisonment with confiscation of property for the murder of Shcherban. The defendants were members of a criminal group operating in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. The leader of the group, Yevhen Kushnir, died in the Donetsk pre-trial detention center.
In April, Shcherban's son, Donetsk Regional Council deputy Ruslan Shcherban, stated that he had handed over documents to the Prosecutor General's Office regarding the possible involvement of former Prime Ministers Tymoshenko and Lazarenko in his father's murder.