The High Council of Justice may acquit Judge Hennadiy Salay in the case of illegal covert investigative actions against a lawyer

As "Judicial-Legal Newspaper" learned from its own sources, the High Council of Justice plans to uphold the decision of the Third Disciplinary Chamber of the HCJ dated March 20, 2024, refusing to bring to disciplinary responsibility the judge of the Chernihiv Court of Appeal, Hennadiy Salay.

Currently, the High Council of Justice is reviewing complaints from lawyers Antonina Slavytska and Rostyslav Kravets against the corresponding decision of the Third Disciplinary Chamber of the HCJ.

The matter is being considered in a closed session.

According to information obtained from insider sources, the HCJ intends to state that the Third Disciplinary Chamber correctly established the absence of disciplinary offenses in the actions of the judge as defined by subparagraphs "a", "b" of paragraph 1, paragraph 4 of part one of Article 106 of the Law of Ukraine "On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges".

This concerns possible intentional or negligent violations of procedural law norms, illegal denial of access to justice, failure to state reasons for accepting or rejecting parties' arguments, as well as gross violations of the law that led to significant negative consequences.

Essence of the case

The lawyers filed disciplinary complaints accusing Judge Hennadiy Salay of illegally granting permissions for covert investigative (search) actions (CISA) and violating the rules of automated case distribution.

Specifically, it concerns rulings by the investigating judge of the Chernihiv Court of Appeal, Hennadiy Salay, dated February 4, 2019, and May 29, 2019, which authorized CISAs against lawyer Antonina Slavytska.

The complainants emphasize that these rulings were issued with numerous gross violations of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, and the judge failed to exercise proper judicial control.

Main claims against the judge

• Submitting a motion for CISA against a lawyer by an improper subject (an ordinary investigator, not the Prosecutor General or regional prosecutor);
• Artificially "linking" the case to a criminal proceeding in the "Maidan case," to which lawyer Slavytska had no relation;
• Lack of real judicial control over the proportionality and justification of covert actions.

However, the main claims concern procedural activity, namely violation of territorial jurisdiction: Hennadiy Salay granted permissions for CISAs based on motions from pre-trial investigation bodies of Kyiv city, which exceeded the jurisdiction of the Chernihiv Court of Appeal.

The judge argued that he acted within the limits of part 2 of Article 247 of the CPC, but the complainants note that the surveillance targets were lawyers, not judges or law enforcement officers, which makes this exception inapplicable.

Particular concern is caused by the fact that the HCJ will likely ignore the position of the European Court of Human Rights in the case "Vykhor v. Ukraine" (decision dated January 26, 2026). Judge Hennadiy Salay's rulings contain the same systemic shortcomings — vague formulations, lack of reasoning regarding the necessity and proportionality of interference with the lawyer's private life — which the ECHR recognized as violations of Article 8 of the Convention.

This expected decision of the High Council of Justice already raises serious doubts about the objectivity and impartiality of the disciplinary body. It may create a dangerous precedent of impunity for illegal authorization of surveillance against lawyers, threatening the principles of the rule of law and the independence of the legal profession in Ukraine.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp, Facebook page Facebook and on Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.