In the Odesa region, a judge is attempting to avoid criminal prosecution by joining the Armed Forces of Ukraine

In the Odesa region, a judge is attempting to avoid criminal prosecution by joining the Armed Forces of Ukraine

Judge of the Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi Court in Odesa region, Valentyn Zaveryukha, requested the closure of the disciplinary case against him in the High Council of Justice, citing his mobilization into the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The HCJ denied his motion, stating that judges are not subject to compulsory conscription, and Zaveryukha chose to serve only when a criminal case for bribery was opened against him. 

This was reported by the High Council of Justice. 

Judge Zaveryukha filed a motion with the HCJ to terminate the consideration of the disciplinary complaint against him. The complaint began to be considered on October 28 of this year following an appeal by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau. The NABU is currently investigating a criminal case, suspecting Valentyn Zaveryukha of receiving bribes on a particularly large scale, aiding in the commission of a criminal offense, and smuggling people across the state border.

According to the investigation, the judge, along with the secretary and consultant of the Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi City District Court, as well as a lawyer, his assistant, and other judges, colluded and facilitated military enlistment evaders in avoiding mobilization for bribes. Law enforcement believes that they interfered with the court’s automated case management system and made fictitious decisions in cases where the subjects were determining the place of residence of a minor child with a conscript father or taking a minor from the mother for living with the father.

Therefore, NABU appealed to the High Council of Justice to hold judge Valentyn Zaveryukha accountable. The judge sought the closure of the disciplinary complaint, as he would very much like to participate in the session of the First Disciplinary Chamber of the High Council of Justice, but cannot, as he is serving in the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

The High Council of Justice denied the judge’s motion. In its explanations, the HCJ states that judge Valentyn Zaveryukha had the opportunity to familiarize himself with the complaint and its arguments and to provide his explanations, which he did not do. The HCJ also notes that judges are not subject to military conscription, so the judge’s mobilization is purely voluntary. Therefore, the High Council of Justice has doubts about the judge’s motivation for mobilization since he joined the Armed Forces of Ukraine immediately after the opening of the criminal proceedings.

Previously, SSU and NABU exposed a large-scale corruption scheme in the court for avoiding mobilization. The investigation established that for a reward of $3,500, judges made decisions that allowed men to avoid conscription and travel abroad. More than a thousand such cases were recorded. Almost all decisions of the Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi City District Court on depriving the mother of the right to raise a child in favor of the father were made by four judges of this court – the head Oleksandr Boyarskyi (364), Serhiy Savytskyi (312), Valentyn Zaveryukha (124), and Yuliya Shevchuk (30).