Chronology of vaks zashkvars: from expensive property to dependence on NABU and "family" editing of sentences

Recently it became known that for judges of, one might say, the elite, Supreme Anti-Corruption Court, the requirement for a 75% passing score for cognitive testing (IQ test) will be abolished. This recommendation was made by the relevant committee of the Verkhovna Rada. In fact, the test will remain, but what it will be and what the passing score will be will be determined by the High Qualification Commission of judges. And here we can hardly expect an increase in requirements, rather the opposite. But does the existing IQ requirement help VAKS work and do judges behave reasonably based on a statist position? UNN decided to investigate this issue.

The Supreme Anti-Corruption Court started its work in September 2019. The court considers cases opened by NABU and SAPO against appointed high-ranking officials (in particular, ministers, their deputies, members of Parliament, heads of state bodies, judges, prosecutors and heads of state-owned enterprises) for committing a crime defined by the list of corruption crimes, the damage caused by which exceeds the established amount of money, which is 500 or more times the subsistence minimum for able-bodied persons (now it is slightly more than UAH 1.5 million). For the first year, the court actually studied the materials transferred to them, and the first sentence with real imprisonment was passed against one deputy of the Kiev Regional Council in June 2020. So, this year we will start our study of the work of VAKS. In the article, we will give only some points that, in our opinion, are remarkable in the work of the court, which raise the issue of the perfection of the selection of judges and balance in the functioning of the body.

2020

In July 2020, a scandal broke out: three vaks judges were accused of being biased in favor of NABU. Then a trio of judges headed by Lesya Fedorak refused to challenge the representatives of ex-MP Mykola Martynenko (the case of embezzlement at SE Energoatom and SE Vostgok). And this is despite the fact that the court presented the facts of personal communication between Judge Fedorak and the then head of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau . in addition, the defense lawyers then drew attention to the fact that the judges changed the procedure for examining evidence in the case in favor of the prosecution represented by NABU. Judges, after such statements by lawyers, also began to act and appealed to the High Council of justice and the prosecutor general with a statement about alleged violations on the part of defenders. the latter, in turn, stated that lawyers are simply intimidated by criminal liability. Finally, in 2023, one of the ex-MP's lawyers was brought to disciplinary responsibility for delaying the consideration of the case, which is still being heard in court. And this whole story would really look like an ordinary attempt by the defense to delay time for its client, who is at large after making bail. However, there is one "but" in it, which we mentioned above: the communication of Judge Fedorak with the head of the NABU – then it was Artem Sytnyk. And although the judge herself denied informal communication with Sytnyk, the question arises: wouldn't it be logical to at least consider a petition for recusal of judges, since such reproaches were made against them? In addition, Fedorak, like many other judges, was repeatedly suspected of playing along with the NABU and the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's office in various cases. In the end, this situation spilled out into dissatisfaction on the part of European partners, as the director of the Kharkiv Human Rights Group Yevgeny Zakharov drew attention to after the publication in 2024 of the shadow report of the European commission.

According to him, instead of being independent of NABU and SAPO, the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court is increasingly playing along with them, distorting the principles of Justice. So, the situation with the top three judges in 2020 was probably only the first bell that announced a bad trend of dependence of VAKS on NABU and SAPO.

At the same time, it became known that the vaks judges were provided with official housing – all judges were purchased and provided with official apartments. and this is against the background of the fact that the judge of the vaks appeals chamber, Mr. Viktor Pakulich admitted at an interview with the Ethics Council that each vaks judge has a country house and is actually provided with housing, but still requested and received apartments.

2021

On September 15, 2021, the panel of judges of the Third Judicial Chamber of the Cassation Criminal Court as part of the Supreme Court in case No. 711/3111/19 overturned the verdict of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court and the decision of the VAKS appeals chamber and closed the criminal proceedings on charges of committing a crime under Part 2 of Article 369-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (obtaining illegal benefits for yourself for influencing the decision-making by a person authorized to perform state functions). Then the Supreme Court came to the conclusion that sending the indictment to the court after the end of the pre-trial investigation period is a significant violation of the requirements of the criminal procedural legislation, which leads to the cancellation of the verdict and the closure of proceedings in the case. So it turns out that the VAKS judges violate the basic truths of the procedural legislation?

2022

Former deputy head of the Main Department of the state tax service in Kyiv Mykola Ilyashenko appealed in October 2022 to the acting director of NABU Gizo Uglava with a statement in which he said that through an intermediary he was asked to transfer illegal benefits in the amount of 50 thousand rubles. certain persons, including a man who presented himself as an assistant judge of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court named Alexander, for making a decision by the VAKS panel of judges to allocate materials against him (we are talking about the case of former minister of Ecology Mykola Zlochevsky) in separate criminal proceedings and resolving the issue of exemption from liability. Subsequently, according to him, he had to transfer another 50 thousand US dollars.

"At the time of the transfer of the remaining part of the funds, Ilyashenko knew that an acquaintance would resolve his issue through the deputy chairman of the VAKS Court Yevgeny Kruk.

Subsequently, during a meeting between Mykola Ilyashenko and the mediator, the latter reported that Judge VAKS Viktor Maslov, who is the presiding judge in the criminal proceedings against Ilyashenko, demands an insufficient amount of funds up to UAH 1,200,000, and only after receiving the entire amount, judge Maslov will make a decision.

In the early autumn of 2021, a friend announced that he would arrange a meeting for Ilyashenko with the deputy chairman of the VAKS Yevgeny Kruk, but a man named Alexander came to the meeting itself, who introduced himself as an assistant to judge Kruk. During a personal conversation, Alexander informed Ilyashenko that the issue would be resolved and the criminal proceedings against him would be separated into separate proceedings, in confirmation, he presented a draft decision of the vaks panel of judges. During the conversation, Alexander had all the information on the case, including the one that was not known to the applicant (the testimony of his accomplice Elena Mazurova). Alexander said that the decision of the board regarding Ilyashenko will be made immediately after the transfer of funds (200,000 US dollars)," the petition to the Supreme Court, which was later filed by the representative of Ilyashenko, says .

An investigation has begun. But despite this, all judges who were suspected of abuse were not suspended, but continued to administer justice, and later it became known that the NABU, which conducted the investigation, focused exclusively on intermediaries and did not even check judges or their assistants who could be involved.   

The same year was marked by new procedural violations, for example, the VAKS Appeals Chamber decided that there was no need to open the defense materials that became the basis for conducting secret investigative actions against the accused. As a result, the Supreme Court overturned the verdict of a foreigner who was found guilty of paying a bribe to the military prosecutor of the southern region of Ukraine for lifting the arrest from the Sky Moon ship. In general, that year in C, VAKS canceled several sentences.

2023

Then a new scandal broke out around VAKS: it turned out that one of the judges was helped by his wife, a lawyer, when making decisions on high-profile cases. Investigative journalists from " investigation.Info " found out that the investigating judge of the Supreme Anti - Corruption Court (VAKS) Andrey Bitsyuk, who at that time had already worked in this position for more than four years, used the help of his wife, lawyer Anna Nadtochieva, when making a decision on the ex-prosecutor of the Odessa Region . The decision concerns the ex-prosecutor of the Odessa region Oleg Zhuchenko, who in the first days of a full-scale invasion appealed to VAKS with a request to transfer collateral funds to the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Investigating judge Bitsyuk granted the request and relaxed the measure of restraint for the ex-prosecutor. However, as journalists found out, his wife, a lawyer, obviously helped formulate judge VAKS ' decision. They came to this conclusion while studying a document called "Spravazhuch", the author of which is Bitsyuk in the metadata, but Anna Nadtochieva made changes to it. The edited document was sent from an email used by the judge's wife.

The documents obtained and processed by journalists also indicate that Nadtochieva may have had access to the materials of other cases conducted by her husband.

In addition, they claimed that Judge Bitsyuk could share with his wife not only texts of future court decisions, but also confidential information (copies of passports, residential addresses, bank data, etc.) regarding suspects Andrei Gavrilenko and Boris Rodin.

In particular, in the case of another suspect in corruption actions Oleg Bryndak, investigators assured, the investigating judge Bitsyuk sent his wife a number of documents - copies of payment orders, statements of people who posted bail for Bryndak, petitions for changing the measure of restraint, etc.

In a comment to journalists, judge Bitsyuk insisted that no one helps him administer justice. Nadtochieva also initially insisted that she never interfered in the work of her husband, a judge, but later remarked: "then the war started, I was in Transcarpathia. He (judge Bitsyuk - Ed.) worked and lived in court. Maybe he asked me to adjust some text a little because he didn't have time, but I don't remember any details. Theoretically, it could be that I was given a template, told that something needs to be corrected... He never asks me for anything else. I believe that his knowledge is higher than mine," the lawyer said.

In the publication "investigation.Info " then stated that such a "family contract" judge violated the basic principles of Justice. It should be noted that Judge Bitsyuk not only still works at VAKS, but also his wife, apparently inspired by the experience gained in editing court documents, twice (in 2023 and 24) applied for the position of Judge of the same institution.

In addition, in the same year 2023, it became known that Anna Nadtochieva became the owner of a house near Kiev, the cost of which at the time of purchase was estimated at more than 100 thousand dollars. It is noteworthy that the lawyer said that the house was purchased with the joint funds of the spouses in 2020, but it was not included in her husband's declaration for that year. And the date of acquisition of ownership rights falls on the 22nd year.

In the same year became known, Judge of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court Valeria Chernaya in September 2022 became the owner of an elite BMW X6 car from the salon, the cost of which can reach 100 thousand dollars. In addition, in December 2023, the judge purchased a land plot and a small house in Boryspil, near Kiev.

"I am here, I have not traveled abroad and have not stopped my work. I have savings, they accumulate, because I do not spend them, except for assistance on the Armed Forces of Ukraine and covering living expenses. There must be some personal satisfaction, I think I deserve it and have the right to this car," judge Chernaya explained to reporters at the time the reason for her purchase of an expensive car during a full - scale invasion.

2024

In addition to the fact that, as we mentioned above, in 2024, even European officials began to pay attention to the dependence of VAKS on NABU and SAPO, this year was probably the most "fruitful" for this institution in attracting attention due to various kinds of violations and off-limits.

For example, the judge of the Supreme Antikor court Kateryna Sikora, whom the NACP already suspects of illegal enrichment, through the court "knocked out" half a million hryvnias from the budget. 

"Judge VAKS through colleagues squeezed out half a million hryvnias from the state. Kateryna Sikora, whom the NACP suspects of illegal enrichment (!), through the court "knocked out" half a million hryvnias from the budget. This is open information reflected in the judge's declaration. So, the" servant of Themis " decided that the Cabinet of ministers illegally restricted thousands of salaries to top officials and judges during the coronavirus epidemic in 2020. Now 505 thousand should go conditionally not for the purchase of drones for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, but in the pocket of Judge VAKS. I'm not full of covid-I'm catching up with the war. What is this, if not corruption?"- wrote political expert Oleg Posternak.

According to the expert, this contradicts the main function of VAKS, which is designed to protect public funds from encroachments.

"The Supreme Anti-Corruption Court harms Ukraine by millions, although it should protect public funds. There is a lot of information on the web that its employees "master" public money, showing an example of how to "undress" the country. According to lawyers, Judge Sikora has set a dangerous precedent: now thousands of officials and judges will put millions of hryvnias "under-earned" in kovod in their pockets. They will be dragged from the budget of a warring country," he stressed.

He recalled that this enrichment is just one of the few scandals around VAKS.

"Just recently, there was information about Judge Markiyan Galabalu, who illegally received official housing and did not indicate a number of other information in the declaration (lawyer Rostislav Kravets writes about this in his TG channel). Another judge of the Supreme Anti – Corruption Court, Vitaly Kriklivy, was seen in fraud with housing with the help of his wife, who coincidentally is also judge VAKS! Volunteer lawyer Artem Krikun-Trush wrote about this in his column on the UP," Posternak said.

In his opinion, NABU and SAPO turn a blind eye to all this while VAKS stamps out cases commissioned by them.

In the same year, the Appeals Chamber of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court (VAKS) relaxed the measure of restraint for Roman Nasirov's father-in-law, the owner of the Altis group of companies Alexander Glimbovsky, setting a bail of UAH 45 million for him instead of Round-the-clock house arrest. Glimbovsky is suspected of laundering funds from illegal profits, which Nasirov received in the amount of 21 million euros.

conclusions

As we can see, even from the above examples, VAKS collected a complete set of typical judicial sins: procedural violations, illegal enrichment, false declaration, bribery, playing along with one of the parties to the case (in the case of VAKS to the prosecution), and so on.

But, returning to the problem of abolishing the requirements for the results of the IQ test, we can conclude that even increasing these requirements is unlikely to correct the system – smarter judges may get into positions, but will they be more honest and responsible? Will they defend the interests of the state and  adhere to the principles of Justice? Do they continue to act in favor of their own interests or the interests of third parties, simply resorting to more sophisticated schemes to hide abuse?

Probably, the answer to these and other questions lies not only in cognitive tests, but also in the obvious principles – the inevitability of punishment for judges, on an equal basis with other citizens, and in the true independence of VAKS. Otherwise, corrupt officials will continue to be tried for corruption crimes in our country.