Every year, the VSP receives up to 200 appeals from judges, but the facts of pressure are found only in 10% of them – a former member of the VSP
Kyiv • UNN
Andriy Boyko, a former member of the High Council of Justice, said that although the VSP receives up to 200 complaints from judges about interference in the administration of justice every year, only 10% of cases reveal the facts of such interference.
Any interference in the activities of the court is prohibited and criminalized. Every year, the High Council of justice receives up to 200 appeals from judges, but only in 10% of them the VSP sees facts of interference in the administration of Justice. This was stated in an exclusive comment to UNN by a former member of the VSP, ex-dean of the Faculty of Law of Lviv National University Andriy Boyko.
Details
Earlier , the chairman of the tax committee of the Rada, Daniil Hetmantsev, published several messages in the Telegram channel,in which he called on the public to put pressure on the court and openly criticized the judges ' decisions. Judge of the Shevchenko District Court of Kyiv Vitaliy Tsiktich appealed to the High Council of justice and the Office of the prosecutor general with a statement about pressure from Getmantsev and attempts by the MP to influence the court's decision and interfere in its activities. After that, Hetmantsev published another message in which criticized the decision of the panel of judges of the Dnipropetrovsk District Administrative Court. They admitted that the National Bank made an illegal decision to revoke the license and start liquidating Concord bank. Probably, in this way Hetmantsev wanted to influence the judges who will consider the NBU's appeal.
"Any interference in the administration of justice is prohibited. Moreover, there is criminal liability for interference in the activities of a judge in connection with the administration of Justice. According to the law, the judge applies simultaneously to the GRP and the UCP. Well, it is clear – the prosecutor general, if he sees that there are grounds, enters (data – ed.) in the Register of pre - trial investigations and the pre-trial investigation begins," Boyko said.
According to him, after the VSP receives a judge's application for interference in its activities, a speaker from the members of the High Council of justice is determined by automated distribution, who, after studying the materials, submits the issue to the body for consideration. If the VSP sees signs of interference in the court's activities, it applies to the committee on rules of procedure, parliamentary ethics and organization of work of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and informs the Parliament about the fact of interference. In addition, the VSP also has the right to apply to the Prosecutor General of Ukraine.
"We are well aware that the effectiveness of establishing all the circumstances that are related to possible interference (in the activities of the court – Ed.) lies with the pre-trial investigation bodies, that is, whether the pre-trial investigation is really effective, whether all the circumstances related to interference in the activities of the judge are established, and, accordingly, the result of the pre-trial investigation. But, to be honest, I don't remember that there were any materials of the pre – trial investigation at all and that the fact of interference in the activities of a judge of a people's deputy was transferred to the court (materials - Ed.)," Boyko added.
He noted that judges apply to the GRP every year – this is somewhere from 150 to 200 appeals every year. However, only in 10% of them, according to Boyko, the GRP states that there is a fact of interference in the activities of the court. "But to be honest, I don't remember such an effective response," Boyko said.
recall
Earlier, the president of the All-Ukrainian Association of judges, retired Denys Nevyadomsky, noted that Hetmantsev's appeals violate the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The MP, according to him, in particular calls for interference in the activities of the court, and also violates the presumption of innocence.
Lawyer Dmitry Kasyanenko noted that Getmantsev's message can be regarded as pressure on the judge and influence on his decision. Lawyer Serhiy Lysenko believes that Hetmantsev is trying to influence the court through social networks through public opinion and assumes the role of a judge, determining which decision of Themis Buda is legal in criminal proceedings on illegal tobacco.
