On December 25, 2023, a letter was sent from a building at 8 Petro Bolbochan Street, signed by Pavlo Vovk, a judge of the Kyiv District Administrative Court (KDAC), who previously headed this court. The addressee indicated on the envelope is Hryhoriy Usyk, Chairman of the High Council of Justice (HCJ).
Judge Vovk sounded the alarm, convinced Usyk: they say, the authority of the entire Supreme Council - the self-governing body that appoints and dismisses all judges of Ukraine - was under threat. The reason for this is Roman Maselko, a member of the Supreme Court of Justice, a former lawyer. According to Vovk, Maselko has a "formed biased attitude" towards a number of judges, and therefore he has a "permanent real conflict of interest..., including with regard to the judges of the Supreme Court of Justice of Ukraine". For these reasons, Judge Vovk advised the Chairman of the Supreme Court of Justice of Ukraine Usyk, Roman Maselko should be dismissed immediately.
The highlight of this story is that more than a year has passed since the liquidation of the District Administrative Court of Kyiv, but as we can see, this body is still alive. The “vitality” of the District Court under the current administration may seem absurd. But the fact remains: despite its liquidation and despite the war, fifty judges of the District Administrative Court continue to receive solid remuneration, while doing nothing. They do not administer any justice: they do not issue decisions and resolutions. And some judges, in particular the aforementioned Pavlo Vovk, better known to society for the NABU case “Vovk’s Films”, are also trying to further influence the entire justice system.
Millions for beautiful eyes
At the end of November 2023, the liquidated Kyiv District Administrative Court had 51 judges. Almost each of them received more than UAH 1 million in judicial remuneration over the 11 months. In total, for January-November 2023, judges of the Kyiv District Administrative Court were paid UAH 65.3 million in remuneration, of which UAH 51.1 million was paid in cash (taking into account canceled taxes).
In total, for January-November 2023, judges of the Ukrainian Administrative Court of Appeals were awarded UAH 65.3 million in remuneration
Some judges were not lazy and declared the money they received, which was paid to them by the state. In particular, judge Nataliya Klymenchuk indicated that in November 2023 she received UAH 143.8 thousand in salary from a court that is inactive.
Solid payments "fell" to judges of the OASC Tetyana Sheiko and Oleksandr Karmazin - 209.6 thousand UAH and 295.4 thousand UAH, respectively. We add that all judges and civil servants are required to declare monthly incomes exceeding 50 subsistence minimums (134 thousand UAH) established for able-bodied persons as of January 1 of the relevant year (in 2023 - 2684 UAH).
The earnings of Judge Pavlo Vovk, who has a grudge against Supreme Court member Maselko, are also considerable.
In 11 months of 2023, Vovk "raised" UAH 1.6 million out of thin air.
There is no court, but judge Pavlo Vovk earned UAH 1.6 million in 11 months of 2023.
Let us recall that a year ago, the aforementioned member of the High Council of Justice, Roman Maselko, warned: the liquidation of the Kyiv District Administrative Court does not mean the automatic dismissal of judges. They will remain judges and will receive judicial remuneration without allowances.
Why did Zelensky and the Rada “destroy” the court?
Why did such a paradox arise: there is no court, but judges pretend to work and receive remuneration?
Let's go back to the recent past. In April 2021, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy responded to an electronic petition and an appeal from anti-corruption public organizations to launch the procedure for liquidating the capital's District Administrative Court. In particular, the head of state sent the relevant draft law to the Verkhovna Rada as urgent.
"In a democratic society, respect and trust in the court should be unconditional. But where trust dies, democracy ends. The Kyiv District Administrative Court has had enough time to reflect, look at itself in the mirror, and find there the simple things that society and the state are so looking for in it - justice, impartiality, and honesty. Instead, we see another scandal with "tapes," corruption by related individuals with safes stuffed with money, and numerous questionable decisions. Trust in the Kyiv District Administrative Court has been lost," the head of state's website says.
The influence of the District Administrative Court was explained by the category of cases that it was supposed to consider.
The OASC had the right to consider:
Appealing against acts of the Cabinet of Ministers, ministries, the National Bank and other central government bodies;
appeals against decisions of the Antimonopoly Committee or claims of this committee against other legal entities;
cases on state aid to business entities;
cases against Ukrainian diplomatic missions or diplomats;
cases against bodies conducting disciplinary proceedings against prosecutors;
cases on the liquidation or banning of political parties.
For example, in the fall-winter of 2013, at the height of Euromaidan, the OASK banned peaceful protests in the center of Kyiv, and on December 9 of the same year, the odious judge Yevheniy Ablov ordered the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the city hall to clear a number of streets, including Independence Square, of barricades and tents; in 2014-2021, the court protected more than 200 lustrated civil servants and security forces, collecting millions in compensation from the state budget; in April 2019, the court upheld the lawsuit of oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky against the National Bank and the Cabinet of Ministers and declared the nationalization of PrivatBank illegal; In 2019, the OASK declared the ban on actor Fyodor Dobronravov's entry into Ukraine unlawful and annulled the ban on the rebroadcasting of some films with his participation, in particular, the TV series "Matchmakers"; in January 2021, the court annulled the new edition of Ukrainian spelling.
The peak of cynicism in the history of this court was the consideration of the lawsuits filed by ex-president Viktor Yanukovych in November-December 2021, that is, on the eve of Russia's armed invasion of Ukraine. They noted that on February 22, 2014, the parliament did not have the authority to vote on the resolution on the self-removal of the president of Ukraine from the exercise of constitutional powers and the appointment of extraordinary presidential elections. Also, according to Yanukovych, in 2015 the Rada illegally deprived him of the title of President of Ukraine.
A priori, the court should have refused the fugitive president due to missing the deadline for appealing the acts of parliament. However, two lawsuits of the former president were taken up for consideration. The final verdict (rejecting both lawsuits) was given by the OASC only at the end of April 2022, when it became clear that the occupiers had retreated from the capital.
As Glavkom wrote, the version that the judges of the Supreme Court of Ukraine deliberately "pickled" Yanukovych's cases, waiting for the development of events at the front, is quite logical. As the former head of the Security Service of Ukraine departments in Donetsk and Luhansk regions, Major General-Reserve Oleksandr Petrulevych, confirmed in an interview with Gordon, the court should have made a decision on Yanukovych immediately after the Russians took Kyiv.
"Russia has already prepared the president. And here is the aspect of personal satisfaction of a specific person - Putin. He was insulted in 2004, when Yanukovych did not become president. In 2010, he did "punch" him into the position of president. Restore him to office, change the power - and we will have a state completely under Russian control. Everything was clearly planned, but no one paid attention to it. Now I have a question: where are the judges who made these decisions? Did anyone make any claims against them? I'm not talking about bringing them to criminal responsibility. Didn't they understand what they were doing? They understood perfectly," Petrulevych is convinced.
In general, despite all the aforementioned scandals and suspicions, it took parliamentarians more than a year to consider the urgent presidential draft law on the liquidation of the capital's court.
What's next?
Journalists sent requests to the State Judicial Administration and the High Council of Justice with a request to inform about the future fate of the premises of the District Administrative Court (Velyka Vasylkivska Street, 81A and Petra Bolbochana Street, 8), as well as further employment or dismissal of judges of the District Administrative Court. After all, according to the law, the Kyiv City District Administrative Court should appear in place of the OASC. Until the new court is established, all cases of the OASC are transferred to the Kyiv District Administrative Court.
The premises of the Kyiv District Administrative Court are located at Petro Bolbochan, 8
photos from open sources
By the way, the transfer of cases from the OASC to the Kyiv District Administrative Court was supposed to take place within 10 days. But here too, there is a delay. Out of about 64 thousand cases and materials that were in the proceedings of the liquidated court, in the first half of 2023, 30,086 cases and materials were received by the Kyiv District Administrative Court.
The State Judicial Administration responded dryly to the point: the further fate of the two buildings of the Kyiv District Administrative Court will be decided after the completion of the liquidation procedures. And they clarified: the liquidation of the Kyiv District Administrative Court itself "takes a long time.".
As for the further transfer of judges from the liquidated Supreme Administrative Court, during the year only Judge Volodymyr Donets expressed such a desire. The High Council of Justice “seconded” him to the Kyiv District Administrative Court.
Within a year after the liquidation of the OASC, only Judge Volodymyr Donets expressed a desire to transfer to another court
Two more servants of Themis, Alyona Mazur and Yevhenii Ablov, have asked for their resignation. By the way, the Supreme Judicial Council is very reluctant to dismiss the latter of his own free will. And, most likely, he intends to dismiss him "under the article" - for committing a significant disciplinary offense. On December 26, a message appeared on the website of the High Council of Justice: the consideration of Ablov's application has been suspended pending the consideration of disciplinary complaints that were previously received against this judge.
Judge Yevhen Ablov, at the height of Euromaidan, on December 9, 2013, ordered the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the city hall to remove barricades and tents from Independence Square and other streets.
The thing is that Judge Ablov is known for a number of scandalous decisions. A voice similar to Ablov's voice was recorded on the infamous "Vovk tapes". There he turned to the former head of the OASC Pavlo Vovk with a proposal: "Boss, let's do something. I'm ready." According to the investigation, the criminal organization headed by the former head of the District Administrative Court (it included 12 people in total) aimed to seize state power by establishing control over the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine, the High Council of Justice and creating artificial obstacles in their work.
In July 2019, the NABU conducted a search of the OASC building, and recordings known as the “Vovk tapes” became publicly available. On them, a person whose voice is similar to that of the court chairman Pavlo Vovk discusses with other interlocutors the influence on the courts and government bodies, as well as how to “seize” and “hold” power. In part of the recordings, a man whose voice is similar to Vovk boasts that he agreed not to bring to disciplinary responsibility some OASC judges who issued decisions banning rallies on Maidan in 2013 and other decisions against participants in the Revolution of Dignity. In particular, these are Bohdan Sanin and Yevheniy Ablov. Based on these facts, the NABU and the SBU initiated criminal proceedings against Vovk and his colleagues.
Pavlo Vovk himself denies the authenticity of these recordings, but states that, in his opinion, foreign agents, at the behest of other states, are trying to seize the judiciary in Ukraine in order to deprive the country of its sovereignty.
In addition, information has appeared about the wanted list for the son of Judge Ablov. Law enforcement officers suspect Ivan Ablov of premeditated murder. This happened on January 1, 2024.
At the same time, the head of the High Council of Justice, Hryhoriy Usyk, expressed his assurance that all judges of the High Council of Justice will undergo a thorough check. "None of them have passed the qualification assessment, and without it they cannot be transferred to another court. Therefore, fears that they will be automatically transferred to a new court are in vain," the head of the High Council of Justice said in an interview with the media.
However, Mr. Usyk did not clarify the key point: how much longer will the state, which is waging war, finance the inactive servants of Themis at taxpayers' expense?
