There is evidence of interference of Venediktova’s Office in the work of the High Anti-Corruption Court in the case of Tatarov

Prosecutor of the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO) Andriy Grytsan tried to put pressure on the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) in order to remove the case of deputy head of the Presidential Office Oleg Tatarov from its jurisdiction.

Prosecutor of the PGO Andriy Grytsan, who replaced prosecutors of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) after illegal transfer of the case from the NABU to the SBU, wrote letter to chairman of the HACC Olena Tanasevych asking not to conduct judicial supervision over Tatarov’s case. The Anti-Corruption Action Center received scan of the letter from the Anti-Corruption Court in response to official request.

Such appeals of the prosecutor to the court are not provided by the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (CPC), that means that they have signs of extra-procedural interference in the work of court. After all, it is forbidden to deviate from norms provided for in the CPC in criminal proceedings.

“It is absolutely obvious that Tatarov’s case is dumped. The proceeding was specially transferred from the NABU, the suspicion was deliberately changed, first they ignored, and then they made pressure on the HACC. This was done by Zelenskyi’s prosecutors generals-wards. This is the most insolent dumping of the case of TOP-official in the history of the NABU. Neither Venediktova, nor courts, nor the SBI would dare to ignore so defiantly the law without the presidential sanction”, commented the Chairman of the Board at the AntAC Vitaliy Shabunin.

It is worth to note that this is not the first interference of Grytsan in work of the court. Earlier, during the meeting the head of the Appeals Chamber of the HACC Daniyila Chornenko stated that the prosecutor had written her the letter. In it the prosecutor also had asked to stop the judicial control over Tatarov’s case. 

Then, Chornenka answered that the appeal did not conduct it. This was the prerogative of investigating judges. However, taking into account such step of the prosecutor Grytsan, she pointed out to him the inadmissibility of interfering in judge’s activities and recommended to take into account provisions of article 376 of the Criminal Code, which provides responsibility for such interference.

We should recall that on February 17, the Appeals Chamber of the HACC sent the appeal to the Prosecutor General Iryna Venediktova with the demand to encourage the SBI to provide the decision of Pechersk court to the Anti-Corruption Court, under the guise of which the Prosecutor General’s Office illegally took Tatarov’s case from the NABU.

Today, the deputy head of the Presidential Office Oleg Tatarov tries to illegally cancel the suspicion through Shevchenkivskyi court, although it cannot consider the case at all according to the CPC. This is the jurisdiction of the Anti-Corruption Court.

Meanwhile, terms of pre-trial investigation has expired. Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv, prosecutors of the PGO had illegally sent the appeal, refused to extend terms. The case will either be closed, most likely, or materials will be opened for Tatarov and his lawyers, after which they will be sent to court. In the second case, the case is over, because it was illegally taken from the NABU and the SAPO, and only they can represent the prosecution in it.

Share the news

Also read

All news
Rada’s Committee recommended destroying financial control over top officials at the request of MP from Batkivshchyna party
Furniture instead of medicines, “Great Construction” and inflated prices. The AntAC analyzed the year of COVID procurements
How Pechersk court became a safe haven for suspects of the NABU’s investigations

subscription

Get the AntAC's news first
By filling in this form, I agree to the terms&conditions Privacy Policy