Failures of the HCJ-4

A category of cases that turned out rather problematic and scandalous for the HCJ is honorable retirement with enormous “pensions” approved for judges whose actions clearly merit dismissal for disciplinary violations.
‍
Such a situation occurred in the situation of honorable retirement of Odesa Appellate Court judge Kniaziuk, who was repeatedly found allegedly driving under influence — it was after yet another such incident that Kniaziuk decided to retire. The High Council of Justice could have prevented this, as stated by the reporting HCJ member, who suggested postponing this issue until consideration of the disciplinary complaint against Kniaziuk. However, the majority of HCJ members clearly saw no issue with taxpayers funding a perpetual considerable “pension” of a judge who grossly violated the law.

We should also mention the decisions on honorable retirement of judges Karnasevych and Kovbasa, who exempted drivers from administrative liability in DUI cases. Judge Kovbasa is known for letting off a driver with signs of drug intoxication who explained his behavior by having eaten a poppy seed bun. The driver was not punished and later, while driving under influence again, caused a fatal accident in which an 18-year-old passenger died.

The following two cases where unscrupulous judges were able to retire honorably or almost accomplished this result require a more thorough analysis.

The HCJ Decided that Maidan Judge Cherednichenko Deserved Honorable Retirement and Major Payments from the State Budget

Responsible: Salikhov, Sasevych, Kvasha, Kovbii, Kotelevets, Burlakov, Bondarenko, Melnyk, Usyk, Bokova, Popikova, Plakhtii
‍
A decision that turned out quite scandalous for the “new” HCJ was honorable retirement of judge Cherednichenko of Holosiivskyi District Court of Kyiv.

Cherednichenko is known as a Maidan judge: during Euromaidan, she ordered 24-hour house arrest for activist Dmytro Poltavets (case No. 752/2379/14-k). During the Revolution, the man was brutally beaten by police officers. Doctors later found that he suffered a concussion, a bruised chest, and multiple hemorrhages. The activist was taken to the police station unconscious, where he was then informed of suspicion. During the hearing on February 14, 2014, judge Cherednichenko was not convinced by the fact of unfounded suspicion, and she sentenced the activist to house arrest. The ECtHR recognized this to be a gross violation of the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Other Maidan judges were dismissed in connection with disciplinary liability in similar cases, and such dismissals were recognized legal in court, for instance, in the Ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of April 15, 2021, in case No. 800/331/16 (800/13/16), as well as in the Ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of September 2, 2021, in case No. 800/23/17 (800/182/16).

Despite this, in the case of judge Cherednichenko, the High Council of Justice decided to refrain from this practice. Instead, citing formal delays with resolving the issue of opening a disciplinary case against the judge, it rushed to consider and grant Cherednichenko’s application for honorable retirement.

The HCJ Helps Judge Andriienko Avoid Qualification Assessment by “Honorable” Retirement

Responsible: Burlakov, Kovbii, Melnyk, Salikhov, Plakhtii

At the end of 2023, the HCJ resumed considering the consideration of disciplinary cases and was immediately caught making a scandalous decision on refusing to bring judge of Oktiabrskyi District Court of Poltava Andriienko to disciplinary liability.

The complaint was about delaying the consideration of 49 cases of drivers (for DUI), which helped them avoid liability. There were clear signs that in two cases, judge Andriienko falsified court decisions and information on court hearings. Among other things, these cases were closed before the statute of limitations on the cases expired. Subsequently, there were decisions on “fixing a writing error,” where the hearings allegedly took place after the statute of limitations expired. However, there are no summonses or any other evidence that they ever took place. This could result in a dismissal, but thanks to the HCJ, the judge remains in office.

Previously, the HCJ brought other judges to disciplinary liability in similar cases multiple times even for significantly less numerous cases of helping drivers avoid administrative liability. However, it refused to do so here, limiting itself to indicating that there was no evidence that the judge's behavior was intentional and had an illegal purpose. HCJ member Salikhov proposed to close the proceeding, which was supported by Burlakov and Melnyk.

Interestingly, the Council pointed out the “undoubtedly positive” characteristic of judge Andriienko, even though the judge had previously been suspended for disciplinary liability under another HCJ decision.

As of now, Andriienko has applied for retirement and is doing everything to avoid a qualification assessment, which may result in her dismissal.

There are therefore reasonable worries that the HCJ turns a blind eye to evident violations by Andriienko and falsification of documents in considering a disciplinary complaint, which is documented in the updated opinion of the Public Integrity Council of February 7, 2024, to give her an opportunity for comfortable retirement.
‍
It should be noted, though, that now, the HCJ has finally suspended the consideration of Andriienko’s retirement application, and only 5 members voted to resume it (Burlakov, Kovbii, Melnyk, Salikhov, Plakhtii).

The HCJ Approves “Honorable” Retirement of Unscrupulous Judges

The HCJ Decided that Maidan Judge Cherednichenko Deserved Honorable Retirement and Major Payments from the State Budget

The HCJ Helps Judge Andriienko Avoid Qualification Assessment by “Honorable” Retirement