Due to court formalities: ex-prosecutor Kazak retained pension payments and is suing for 5 million hryvnia in compensation

Due to court formalities: ex-prosecutor Kazak retained pension payments and is suing for 5 million hryvnia in compensation

The Supreme Court of Ukraine refused to consider the cassation appeal filed by the Deputy Prosecutor General, which sought to cancel the excessive pension of Dmytro Kazak, former head of the Mykolaiv Regional Prosecutor’s Office. The judges ruled that the representative of the Prosecutor General’s Office lacked sufficient procedural rights to challenge the monthly payments exceeding 150,000 hryvnias.

Courts of first instance and appeal had previously upheld 36-year-old Dmytro Kazak’s right to receive a high pension. The Prosecutor General’s Office attempted to challenge these rulings, citing the need to restore social justice, but the Supreme Court blocked consideration of the appeal on formal grounds.

How the pension dispute arose

Following government reforms introduced in 2025, the Cabinet of Ministers established special coefficients that significantly reduced payments to former senior officials. As a result, Dmytro Kazak’s pension was cut by approximately two-thirds, prompting him to turn to the courts to protect his interests.

The Kharkiv District Administrative Court and the Second Administrative Court of Appeal sided with the former prosecutor. They fully granted the claim and ordered the state to restore payments in full, causing Kazak’s monthly pension to again exceed 150,000 hryvnias.

Position of the Prosecutor General’s Office and the court’s conclusion

The Prosecutor General’s Office considered the lower courts’ decisions unfounded and contrary to state interests. The Deputy Prosecutor General filed a cassation appeal with the Administrative Cassation Court within the Supreme Court, hoping to prove a violation of the principle of equality of citizens before the law.

“Challenging the decision regarding the former prosecutor’s pension will contribute to restoring general social justice, which constitutes a public interest.” — Prosecutor General’s Office.

Despite the public importance of the case, the Administrative Cassation Court refused to examine the appeal on its merits. The judges concluded that the Deputy Prosecutor General lacks administrative procedural capacity in this proceeding. Consequently, the previous rulings in Kazak’s favor remained in force.

Residence in Sweden and new financial claims

Public outcry grew after Dmytro Kazak’s asset declaration became known. In it, he indicated that he actually resides in Sweden. Receiving large sums from the Ukrainian budget while living abroad raised additional public questions.

In addition to the pension lawsuit, the former prosecutor filed another claim seeking nearly 5 million hryvnias in compensation for allegedly underpaid funds during his service. This lawsuit indicates Kazak’s intention to maximize financial recovery through the courts.

Public resonance and systemic problem

The case of Dmytro Kazak vividly illustrates the problem of excessively high pensions for former law enforcement officers and judges. Despite government attempts to limit such payments during wartime, certain officials have successfully restored them through the courts. Such precedents heighten social tension and erode trust in state institutions.

• Pension coefficients: In 2025, the government introduced restrictions that reduced Kazak’s payments threefold.
• Judicial precedent: Rulings by the Kharkiv courts allowed the restoration of monthly payments exceeding 150,000 hryvnias.
• Procedural obstacles: The Supreme Court did not consider the appeal due to the Deputy Prosecutor General’s lack of procedural capacity.
• Additional claims: The former prosecutor is seeking nearly 5 million hryvnias in further compensation.

The decision also highlights deficiencies in procedural legislation that limit the Prosecutor General’s Office’s ability to defend state interests in administrative courts. As a result, questionable lower-court rulings often remain unreviewed.

Consequences of the ruling and future prospects

The Supreme Court’s refusal to consider the cassation appeal effectively ends the prosecution’s attempts to reduce Kazak’s pension through existing legal means. This creates a precedent that other former law enforcement officers may exploit. State bodies will need to seek new legislative mechanisms to address the issue.

Further developments will depend on the outcome of the 5-million-hryvnia claim and Parliament’s response to the problem of pension privileges. If the court also grants this claim, the budget will face additional strain. The public will continue to monitor such cases closely as an indicator of fairness within the system.