Yesterday on one of the Internet resources a joint article of four public organizations about candidates for the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court it was published with their analysis of property, business and political connections of candidates and their families, as well as previous court decisions of candidates, formed a list of applicants whose reputation, in their opinion, is in doubt.
This list includes 55 people. They are candidates for the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court or its Appeals Chamber out of 113, who successfully passed the exams and went through to the next stage.
Including four questions have been brought to me.
I decided to respond publicity given the possible interest of the legal and not only community to such a topic, and my personal interest in connection with participation in the competition for the position of judge of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court.
The first question concerns not specifying the data on the place of residence in Donetsk, while from September 6, 2012 to June 1, 2013 I worked as a judge of the Kirovsky District Court of Donetsk.
Yes, this information is true. I have never declared property in Donetsk in any declaration.
It happened that on September 6, 2012, I was appointed as a judge of the Kirovsky District Court in Donetsk.
And on September 7, 2012 I gave birth to my son prematurely, and therefore I was on sick leave and postpartum leave for a long time.
All this time, in particular, at the end of the reporting year 2012, I lived in Kharkov at the place of registration with my elder son, therefore, in the column «place of residence» I noticed the Kharkov address.
According to paragraph 4 of the Notes to the Law of Ukraine «On the principles of preventing and combating corruption» on April 7, 2011 with amendments of August 12, 2012, the subject of declaration in position 2 of a paper declaration of property, income, expenses and liabilities of a financial nature for this year should indicate information about the place of residence with the address of living only at the end of the reporting year.
By December 31, 2012, I came to Donetsk and to Kiev, taking the oath of the judge, but at these places there was no place of residence at the end of 2012.
From January to April 2013 I lived in Donetsk from Monday to Friday, I do not remember the exact address, as well as in Kharkov during the period of Saturday-Sunday at the registration address (in May 2013, it seemed to me I was on vacation and I also lived at the place of registration in Kharkov).
By the way, I have a similar situation with the declaration of property, income, expenses and liabilities of a financial nature for 2013, in particular, the information is in position 2 at the place of residence.
So, since June 3, 2013 I was enrolled as a judge of the Solomensky District Court in Kiev.
However, since November 2013 I was on prenatal leave, I lived in Kharkov, where on December 11, 2013 I gave birth to a son.
At the end of the reporting year, 2013 I also continued to live with children in Kharkiv at the place of registration until September 1, 2014.
The second question is to comment the circumstances noted in the profile of the controversy with the police officers in February 2017 and the road accident in March 2018.
So, by the decision of the Shevchenko district court of Kiev dated August 01, 2017, the actions of two patrol police officers were recognized as unlawful and noted that they acted unprofessionally.
It was found out that during the work day on February 21, 2017 my car was parked in the absence of a prohibiting parking or stopping the vehicle sign. The traffic was not interrupted.
When I approached my car in the evening, I noticed that it was blocked by cars in front and from behind. In spite of the fact that the place where the cars stood was tilted and my car could just slide down during the movement and damage the car in front of me, considering the weather conditions, I realized that I could not drive.
On the road, there was only one free line for traffic, on which the patrol car was moving. Having become equal in parallel with my car, the patrol car is impossible an oncoming journey and a detour of vehicles. When the patrol officer «drove off» his car, the traffic movement resumed, which was established from the video surveillance camera records from the building next door, examined at the court hearing.
More details on the links below:
Video these events that was common on the network, according to an expert study by the Kiev Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Examination, it has signs of processing using Adobe Systems Premiere Pro CC 2017/0 software (a professional non-linear video editing software from Adobe Systems).
These records have signs of mounting and are fake.
They are not original and are derivatives.
Please note that the original video is missing.
The second proceeding is disciplinary. By the order of the Patrol Police leadership, according to the results of the conducted internal investigation, these patrol police officers were brought to disciplinary responsibility and a disciplinary punishment was imposed for violation of official discipline, including the offensive use of profanity in relation to me.
Criminal proceedings - is the Prosecutor's Office of Kiev carried out a pre-trial investigation of criminal proceedings under Part 2 of Article 365 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine on the fact that the patrol police officers exceeded their authority.
In addition, there were two informal meetings between me and these two police officers (outside the prosecutor’s office and the court) for our common initiative. During them, we not only discussed all the «sharp» edges of this situation, but also came to an agreement.
As it turned out, reason for such actions of the patrol officers was poor qualification and fatigue, as they later admitted to me, that they worked the second day without rest from duty.
This is undoubtedly a major asset, for adults to find the strength and wisdom in themselves not to hush up the problem, but to settle it.
The «conflict» has been exhausted.
On an accident on March 1, 2018, a traffic accident involving a Toyota Rav-4 car under my control and a Toyota Camry took place on that day. By a resolution of the Kyiv-Svyatoshinsky District Court of the Kiev Region of May 21, 2018, I was found guilty of committing an administrative offense under Article 124 of the Code of administrative offences of Ukraine and imposed an administrative liability of 340.00 UAH. If I am not mistaken, the fine was paid the next day. During the consideration of the case, I did not deny my guilt. I didn’t manage to cope with driving because of the difficult weather conditions on the first day of spring, which was reflected in the court decision.
Well, the judges are not robots. And judges also fall into an accident. It's very good that nobody was hurt. This is the main thing! And the cars got only minor damage.
The circumstances given in the publication on the third and fourth questions concern my husband.
MY HUSBAND'S PRIVATE PREMARITAL LIFE
I can not comment on the lives of others. Both my husband and I have a premarital past which we do not discuss in the family. I only know that Alexey Zhovnovatyuk and Tatyana Naboka (Yashkina) were engaged.
As follows from the decision of the Supreme Court of September 3, 2018, which is referenced in the publication,
we are talking about the appeal of the decision of the Podilsky district court of Kyiv on March 28, 2016. Accordingly, the circumstances established by this decision took place until 2016.
Instead, my acquaintance with the present man took place only in the fall of 2016.
In April 2013 (the date on which there is also a link in the publication) I was in actual marriage with another man and at that time lived in a completely different place.
So promoted in 2013 - 2016 in the cases of the present husband? «I didn't even know him».
CRIMINAL OR CIVIL DISPUTE ??
Actually, it seems to me that the circumstances presented in this publication are deliberately distorted by these civic organizations.
But this is only an assumption, is not it! And again, it seems, the main question: why is it such a manipulation of public opinion?
Everything is «filed» in a single logical text. But can this woman, being a party to a debt recovery case in a civil case (since there is a reference to a Supreme Court decision in a civil case), have the status of a victim in a civil process?
Therefore, I have a counter question for experts from public organizations who have prepared this profile about me: what court case, according to their statement, is going on today? Civil or criminal? But, the first sentence of this section of the publication deals precisely with the criminal proceedings. So is there a criminal case? – No, there is no criminal case against the husband.
By the way, yesterday I was at the High Qualifications Commission of Judges of Ukraine and got acquainted with my dossier of a candidate for the position of a judge of the High Anti-Corruption Court of Ukraine. In particular, in the certificate of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine it is indicated that on December 26, 2014 the law enforcement agencies received a statement from Yashkino (Naboki) T.M. about the possible commission of the offense Zhovnovatyuk A.N. That`s it. Since 2014, there is no more information on proceedings.
In this case we are talking only about making a statement in the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations statements by Yashkino (Naboki) T.M. in 2014 about the possible commission of a criminal offense by a certain person. According to Article 214 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, such statements must be registered in this registry without an assessment of what is indicated at this stage.
Paying attention, there is no criminal case against the husband.
ABOUT POLITICAL AND BUSINESS TIES
In the profile, at first glance, it is unobtrusively mentioned that my husband, Aleksey Zhovnovatyuk, is an assistant to the people's deputy Ruslan Solvar with the BPP.
Indeed, my husband has been practicing law (lawyer) since 2006.
I am convinced that for such a long time not only one MP was his client. Not only to him alone, he all these years, including today provides legal advice, provides legal assistance.
Any connection between my husband's clients and me is excluded. I do not do politics. I am a judge and my job is to administer justice.
The work is enough at work. In the family, we do not discuss it. Moreover, the work of each of us.
By the way, the issue of conflict of interest to date is solved very simply: either through the procedural way through self- withdrawals / withdrawals, or appeal to the Council of Judges of Ukraine.
By the way, if a conflict of interest does occur, its settlement is provided for in the national legislation: either through the procedural way through self- withdrawal or appeal to the Council of Judges of Ukraine.
VERIFICATION IN QUALIFICATION ASSESSMENT OF JUDGE
By the decision of the High Qualifications Commission of Judges of Ukraine under No. 106 / zp-17 of October 20, 2017, was assigned a qualification assessment of the judges of local and appellate courts for the correspondence with their position, including me.
During the qualification assessment in accordance with the Law of Ukraine «On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges», judges were tested according to the criteria of competence (professional, personal, social), professional ethics and integrity.
According to the results of the meeting of April 17, 2018 - it was decided that I correspond to a position held on the criteria of competence (professional, personal social), professional ethics and integrity.
I draw your attention to the fact that the Ukrainian public, represented by the Public Integrity Council, also did not make any comments on the above criteria regarding me and my behavior during the entire time as a judge. his is evidenced not only by the lack of a conclusion of the Public Council of Integrity about the incompatibility of my position, but even the absence of any negative information from them about me.
COMMUNITY COUNCIL OF INTERNATIONAL EXPERTS
I would like to note that in accordance with to part 4 of Article 8 of the Law of Ukraine “On the High Anti-Corruption Court” with the aim of assisting the High Qualifications Commission of Judges of Ukraine in establishing, for the purposes of a qualification assessment, candidates for the positions of judges of the High Anti-Corruption Court meet the criteria of integrity (morality, honesty, incorruptibility), namely, the legality of the sources of origin of the property, the compliance level of the candidate or his family members with the declared income, the compliance of the lifestyle of the candidate its status, clearly the knowledge and skills to deal with cases falling within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the anti-corruption is formed and operates exclusively Public council of international experts (hereinafter - PCIE).
The site of the PCIE, in turn, is open to any requests both from individuals and from public organizations by link.
It is international experts that, in particular, process the information that comes to them about candidates with preservation of personal data, and it is they who determine the questions to the candidates.
The results of the three online meetings of PCIE indicate that candidates are actively communicating with international experts and provide explanations.
Therefore, it is more correct, in my opinion, from the point of view of compliance with the current legislation, taking into account the desire of public organizations to participate in the selection of judges in this court, to send information about candidates in the PCIE. Not publish unverified information about candidates in public
In any case, each candidate decides for himself whether to answer publicly or to explain in detail all the questions / assumptions about him.
Attempts to form a public opinion through unconfirmed, and in some cases deliberately distorted data, in my opinion, are at least frivolous.
So, experts from the Council of Europe George Stava (Austria), Wilma Van Bentham (the Netherlands), Reda Moliene (Lithuania) in their report «Selection and Evaluation of Judges in Ukraine» explained that the publication of the findings of the Public Council of Integrity that occurs at that stage when the selection procedure has not yet been completed, is premature. Even if the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine, by the results of consideration, reaches the opposite conclusion, the preliminary dossier of the Public Council of Integrity remains online. Because it is not written anywhere when these files are deleted and will be deleted altogether, technically they can stay online forever and, therefore, cause reputational damage to relevant candidates in the future. And thus damage the reputation of the future Court (in this case, the High Anti-Corruption Court)
In this case, I draw an analogy with the publication on this resource of conclusions regarding candidates for the position of judges of four public organizations
and draw attention to the fact that this is wrong from the point of view of Council of Europe experts.
Nevertheless, I will return to my proposal to these public organizations to apply with their profiles directly to the Public Council of international experts without their public disclosure until the final decision on the candidates is made by the authorities.
These are international standards, gentlemen.
On this depends what kind of anti-corruption court we will create together.
«THE GOLD STANDARD OF THE PERFECT JUDGE»
«IDEAL JUDGE» PROFILE
In this report of the expert group of the Council of Europe project George Stavi (Austria), Wilma Van Bentham (the Netherlands), Reda Moliene (Lithuania), experts noted that there is no such thing as an «ideal judge».
Judges are a species of a variety of jurists from many different backgrounds who have one thing in common: dispensing justice in a fair and reasonable way, and in accordance with the law of their jurisdiction, the jurisprudence in that country, and the relevant international provisions and case-law. The issue put forward by Public Integrity Council for the description of the «gold standard» of personal qualities of an ideal judge cannot be dealt with as it is simply not possible. It is very commendable (and understandable) that some want to have the best judges in the world performing in Ukraine, but it cannot be expected by a reasonable observer.
I am still emphasizing full openness and readiness for communications and uncomfortable questions - answers. Go ahead, please.
Раніше «Судово-юридична газета» публікувала блог про полювання на відьом та «золотий стандарт ідеального судді».