Team of Poroshenko’s lawyers has appealed before the Court of Appeal and Pechersk Court, the Security Service of Ukraine, the Prosecutor General’s Office and the High Council of Justice against the court’s decision on illegal forced bringing

The team of lawyers of the fifth President of Ukraine, leader of the political party “European Solidarity” Petro Poroshenko considers the ruling on forced bringing, adopted by the odious Pechersk Court, as being political. Moreover, as having been dictated in the Office of President Zelensky. The legal nullity of the ruling is obvious, and it will be proven by legal means – by means of appeals in 5 instances at least. This is what Igor Golovan, Petro Poroshenko’s lawyer, said.

“The first appeal has been placed with the Security Service of Ukraine, and it concerns a criminal interference with an automated system for distribution of court cases. It is by means of such an interference that the case has been distributed to Sergiy Vovk in particular, an odious judge who had long been linked to Yanukovych’s associate Andriy Portnov,” said lawyer Golovan.

A second appeal has been filed with the Prosecutor General’s Office and it concerns, in particular, a violation of a territorial jurisdiction by an investigator of the State Bureau of Investigations (the SBI). The SBI location in the Shevchenkivsky district is confirmed not only by Google maps, but also by three courts decisions. However, in continuation of questionable traditions under Roman Truba, its former director, the SBI stubbornly keeps going after rulings in need to the “servant” Pechersk Court.

In addition, the Prosecutor General’s Office has been informed that the rulings of the Pechersk Court had been made based on a request of a non-existent unit of the State Bureau of Investigations. As known, it was by a Decree of President Zelensky that a new structure of the SBI had been adopted as from the beginning of the year. Accordingly, a third investigative unit of the first division for pre-trial investigations is no longer existent in the later. That is why a head of this phantom unit, Mr. Koretsky, holds no legal authority for any investigation activity.

Another appeal has been forwarded to the High Council of Justice. As known, a court consideration procedure concerning a people’s deputy of Ukraine, as stipulated by the Criminal Procedure Code, demands a personal presence of the people’s deputy in court. Despite that, Pechersk Court judges were adopting this ruling under top secret conditions. Petro Poroshenko had not been informed about this hearing, as stipulated by the law, and was not present at the one.

The appeal on the violation of the territorial jurisdiction, as well as the violation of the requirements of the Criminal Procedure Code concerning the personal presence of a people’s deputy at court hearings has also been placed with the Court of Appeal of Kyiv.

Yet another appeal with a demand to reconsider the rulings as unjust has been forwarded to the Pechersk District Court.

It is also worth drawing attention to the fact who was the first source of information as regards the rulings of the Pechersk Court and made public fragments of scan-copies of the court decisions. It was Oleksandr Dubinsky, a people’s deputy of “the Servant of the People” party.

As it comes from the so-called «Truba tapes», authenticity of which has been proven by independent foreign experts, direct instructions to the SBI leadership on organizing a political persecution of Petro Poroshenko was given by leadership of the Office of President Zelensky.

The «European Solidarity» stresses that political persecutions in Ukraine are unacceptable. Flagrant violations of the law, instrumentalization of law-enforcement agencies for the sake of settling political scores with the leader of opposition party display a weakness of the present authorities before internal and external challenges, and present a threat to the national security of Ukraine.

Attacks against Petro Poroshenko aim at diverting the attention of society from inability of the present authorities to effectively react at security challenges, to effectively manage economy and to meet its generous pre-election promises.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*