It is necessary to define a specific body that will investigate crimes of judges - MP

It is necessary to identify a specific law enforcement agency that will investigate crimes committed by judges, because now their cases are being "footballed" from one agency to another. This opinion was expressed in an exclusive commentary to UNN by Yulia Yatsyk, a member of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Law Enforcement, chair of the Subcommittee on Criminal Procedure Law and Operational Investigative Activity.

The media reported about the possible bribery of Supreme Court judges Vyacheslav Marynych, Volodymyr Korol and Alla Makarovets, who considered the appeal against Shepelev's sentence and changed it in favor of the former MP, almost releasing him. Hryhoriy Mamka, an MP from the banned Opposition Platform For Life, is allegedly involved in this.

"Of course, they must enter the information (into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations - ed.). I haven't seen these publications, but if there are specific facts - of course, it contains information about the commission of a crime, then they should check the information and register the proceedings," Yatsyk said.

At the same time, she added that law enforcement officers have the right, but not the obligation, to verify information about a possible crime in the media. For verification to take place, publications must contain specific facts.

Yatsyk also added that in order to prosecute judges for corruption, it is necessary to define specific jurisdiction for a specific body in relation to judges, as currently both the NABU and the SBI are investigating cases.

"And if any facts about judges are revealed, they are passed from one law enforcement agency to another, because every law enforcement agency understands that tomorrow I will have to go to this court and I will be an outcast. That is why we need to identify a specific body, define a specific jurisdiction, and ask this body about the crime detection rates for judges. Because in Ukraine, the SBI solves 0.001% of crimes against judges, although this is their direct jurisdiction," Yatsyk said.

Add

Kateryna Butko, head of the public council at the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption (NAPC), believes that the Supreme Court needs to be reformed and cleared of dishonest judges, so that cases like Shepelev's will be considered transparently and efficiently. 

Lawyer and executive director of the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union Oleksandr Pavlichenko told UNN that the High Council of Justice is tasked with forming an independent judicial system in Ukraine without political influence.

Volodymyr Vatras, chairman of the subcommittee on the organization and activities of the Bar and legal aid bodies of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Legal Policy, also stated that the Supreme Court should be cleared of judges who have compromised themselves.

Recall 

A panel of the Supreme Court changed Shepelev's sentence in the escape from custody case and tried to release him. Judges Vyacheslav Marynych, Volodymyr Korol and Alla Makarovets decided to close one of the episodes of the case, which concerned bribery, due to what they considered insufficient evidence. As a result, the former MP's property will not be confiscated in this case. Although, according to experts interviewed by UNN, the Supreme Court judges did not have the right to directly examine any evidence.

In addition, the judges counted the period of Shepelev's stay in the Russian pre-trial detention center as part of the sentence. He was detained in Russia following an extradition request from Ukraine. A year later, Russia refused to extradite the fugitive ex-MP to Ukraine, citing threats to its own national security. It turned out that Shepelev was valuable to Russia because he was an FSB agent and a game player.

The Supreme Court panel also used the 'Savchenko law' and counted Shepeleva's stay in the pre-trial detention center on charges in other cases as part of his sentence.

Prosecutor appealed the actions of the Supreme Court judges to the HCJ.

According to the automatic distribution, the complaint in Shepelev's case will be considered by the first-ever HCJ member who fought at the front against Russia, Olena Kovbiy.