HAC did not cancel suspicion notice for former Kropyvnytskyi prosecutor in Kovalov case

HAC did not cancel suspicion notice for former Kropyvnytskyi prosecutor in Kovalov case
HAC did not cancel suspicion notice for former Kropyvnytskyi prosecutor in Kovalov case

Investigating judge's decision

On 14 October, the investigating judge of the High Anti-Corruption Court (HAC) issued a ruling refusing to satisfy the defence's appeal. This decision concerns the suspicion notice previously served on Volodymyr Izotov, former head of the Kropyvnytskyi District Prosecutor's Office.

The judge ruled: “Refuse to satisfy the lawyer's appeal, filed in the interests of (Izotov – ed.), against the suspicion notice in the criminal proceedings.” It is known that the defence side has already filed an appellate appeal against this decision.

Case context

Criminal proceedings were initiated regarding the obtaining of undue advantage by Yuriy Kovalov, First Deputy Head of the Kirovohrad Regional Prosecutor's Office. Previously, the HAC selected a preventive measure for him in the form of detention on remand.

Details of the accusation

According to the NABU and SAP, Yuriy Kovalov, together with two other individuals, is suspected of obtaining undue advantage. According to the investigative version, the official demanded undue advantage from the deputy director of one of the enterprises of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine and the director of a state enterprise. In exchange for funds and property, the prosecutor promised to close the criminal proceedings.

The total amount of the obtained advantage was $13,500, as well as a Tesla Model X P100D car.

To conceal the received vehicle, the First Deputy Head of the Regional Prosecutor's Office involved the head of the District Prosecutor's Office (Volodymyr Izotov). It was he who helped find a nominee on whose name a power of attorney for the disposal of this property was subsequently issued.

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 ↑