The High Anti-Corruption Court convicted former court head Pavlo Ivchenko of abuse of influence, despite claims of “provocation by an OnlyFans model”

The High Anti-Corruption Court convicted former court head Pavlo Ivchenko of abuse of influence, despite claims of “provocation by an OnlyFans model”

The High Anti-Corruption Court, in a panel of judges, delivered a verdict finding former head of the Oleksandrivskyi District Court of Kirovohrad Region, Ivchenko Pavlo, guilty of abuse of influence.

This is reported by the Telegram channel «Sudom po skhemam» citing case No. 991/264/23.

The court sentenced the former servant of Themis to the maximum fine provided for by the relevant part of the article of the Criminal Code of Ukraine — UAH 93,500.

Details of the scheme: how they «resolved» the issue of «drunk» driving

The events began in August 2022 in Kropyvnytskyi. Patrol police officers stopped a Volkswagen Golf, whose driver refused to undergo a medical examination for intoxication, resulting in a protocol being drawn up against him under Part 1 of Article 130 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses.

Wishing to avoid the deprivation of his driver’s license, the man, through a mutual acquaintance, sought advice from Ivchenko Pavlo. He stated that there were no legal ways to resolve the problem, but offered to help through his connections in the Kirovskyi District Court of Kirovohrad, where the case had been transferred.

To implement the plan, the accused involved an assistant judge of the Kirovskyi District Court, who in turn conspired with the assistant of the presiding judge in the case. The total amount of the bribe for closing the case was USD 1,000. The money was distributed as follows:
· USD 400 — to Ivchenko Pavlo Oleksandrovych;
· USD 100 — to one judge’s assistant;
· USD 500 — to another judge’s assistant.
The accomplices independently prepared and signed a ruling on behalf of the presiding judge (who was not even aware of the case’s existence) to close the proceedings due to the absence of elements of an offense, and then issued it to the driver.

«Pash, we’ve been ordered» and dollars out the window

The money transfer took place on August 26, 2022, in the entrance of the building where the accused lived. That same day, he handed over his share of the money to his accomplice. However, law enforcement officers recorded the actions of the individuals involved.

During searches, one of the assistants sent Ivchenko a message via the Signal messenger with a warning: «Pash. We’ve been ordered». In an attempt to hide evidence, Ivchenko threw four one-hundred-dollar bills out of the window of his fifth-floor apartment. The money was later found and seized by operatives on the land plot adjacent to the building.

The defense’s version about the «provocation by an OnlyFans model» and the whistleblower’s tax debt

During the trial, the defense claimed that provocation had taken place against the former judge. According to the defense, the whistleblower — Voronyuk Nana (formerly Nurkalyikova Anastasiya) — was under the control of law enforcement due to her activities on the OnlyFans platform, and was allegedly forced to induce the judge to commit a crime.

To confirm financial and tax pressure, the defense provided materials from administrative case No. 340/4577/25. The Kirovohrad District Administrative Court recovered from Nana Voronyuk a tax debt of over UAH 284,700 from income received during 2021–2022 on the OnlyFans platform (USD 36,731).

Why the HACC did not believe the provocation claim?

Having examined these circumstances, the panel of judges of the HACC concluded that there was no connection between the whistleblower’s OnlyFans activities and the judge’s detention:
1. Chronology of events: automatic exchange of tax data with the United Kingdom and the subsequent inspection by the State Tax Service took place only at the end of 2024, whereas the exposure of the judge occurred much earlier — in August 2022.
2. Absence of pressure in 2022: at the time of the registration of the criminal proceedings, Ukrainian law enforcement agencies did not possess information about the girl’s OnlyFans income and could not use this fact to pressure or coerce her into cooperation.

Taking this into account, the court rejected the version of provocation and found Pavlo Ivchenko guilty under Part 2 of Article 369-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (abuse of influence). In addition to the fine of UAH 93,500, UAH 6,795.72 in procedural costs were recovered from the former judge.