Judge who ruled against Maidan protests continues to work at HACC

Judge who ruled against Maidan protests continues to work at HACC
Judge who ruled against Maidan protests continues to work at HACC

Inna Bilous, a judge at the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC), has come under scrutiny due to her activities during the Revolution of Dignity. In 2013, she issued rulings banning local Maidan actions, including the one in Ternopil, which was the second largest after Kyiv. Despite these facts, neither public activists nor international experts are taking action.

Silence of activists and experts

Members of the Public Council of the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC), such as Roman Maselko and Mykhailo Zhernakov, have not publicly commented on Bilous's activities. The international panel of experts involved in the evaluation of judges deemed her suitable for work at the HACC.

Lawyer Rostyslav Kravets noted that the current situation raises suspicions of corruption within anti-corruption structures. According to him, the processes of appointing judges and making decisions have become opaque and are causing public distrust.

Inconsistent approach to dismissals

Journalists have pointed out the selectivity in the application of sanctions. Bilous retained her position for actions for which other judges were dismissed. This prompted an appeal to the Constitutional Court requesting a review of the legality of involving international experts in the selection procedures for anti-corruption and judicial bodies.

Lawyer Oleksandr Shram emphasised that such cases cast doubt on the objectivity and legality of the HACC's work.

Criticism from the legal community

Lawyers have long expressed concern that the HACC, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), and associated activists have formed a system that facilitates mutual cover-ups of violations. Such a model undermines the effectiveness of the fight against corruption and causes bewilderment among Ukraine's foreign partners supporting the reforms.

The current situation raises questions about the real independence and effectiveness of anti-corruption structures, which could have serious consequences for trust both domestically and among international donors.

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first!

Leave a comment

Links are not allowed in comments. The editors may remove comments without explanation.
Back to top ↑