Court recognizes criminal charges in Vovk gang, while releasing suspect

The High Anti-Corruption Court of Ukraine ruled on
Aug. 3 not to detain and set bail for Zenoviy Kholodniuk, the head of the State
Judicial Administration who was named among numerous suspects to be in a
criminal gang led by a powerful Kyiv judge, Pavlo Vovk, that sought to seize
power of various institutions through an extensive network of conspiracies, the
pravda.com.ua news site reported. Yet in releasing him on his own recognizance,
the court partially satisfied the Prosecutor General Office’s initial goal of
recognizing the legitimacy of the notice of suspicion and criminal charges, as
well as the need to place Kholodniuk on leave, which has yet to be done, said
Yuriy Butusov, the chief editor of the censor.net.ua news site, in his report
on the incident. This ruling leaves the door open for the prosecution of all
those involved in the alleged conspiracy, he said.

Vovk is the head of the influential Kyiv
Administrative Court, under whose jurisdiction fall all the complaints against
the decisions of any central (Kyiv-based) state institution, including the
cabinet, the ministries, and the central bank. He was named a suspect on July
17 in the crimes of forming a criminal gang and attempting to seize power,
along with five other judges of his own court, Kholodniuk and possibly four
others. One attempt to seize power involved intricate conspiracies to influence
the decisions of the High Qualifications Commission of Judges. The campaign
even involved pressuring and bribing judges – by various state officials –
overseeing the independent testing process, prompting many of them not to
arrive and collectively “fall ill,” the pravda.com.ua news site said. Similar
schemes were hatched to take control of the High Council of Justice.

On the same day (July 17) Vovk and his alleged
co-conspirators were named suspects, National Anti-Corrutption Bureau head
Artem Sytnyk released alleged audio recordings of Vovk and others discussing
their numerous conspiracies to seize power and boasting of their successes,
with a judge in one excerpt blatantly stating, “Pasha, what are we going to do?
What power are we going to take?” Among the numerous conspiracies outlined by
Sytnyk at his press conference involved Vovk and his deputy, Yevgeny Ablov,
developing a plan to forbid state officials from traveling abroad after the
2019 elections, with the goal of “demonstrating the court’s power and ability
to intimidate and avenge former high-ranking officials.” In his report, Butusov
said the recordings may have been obtained illegally. In his turn, Vovk has
insisted they are forgeries.

The prosecutor who issued the notices, Andriy
Liubovych, was called in for a meeting with President Zelensky and Prosecutor
General Iryna Venediktova and removed from the investigation the next day,
Butusov reported. So while criminal charges have been filed, they are not being
pursued. In the view of Butusov, all these events – particularly the
president’s removal of Liubovych but not placing on leave Kholodniuk, Vovk and
the others – indicate the personal involvement of President Zelensky to keep
Vovk and his alleged co-conspirators in place, with the intention of “making
trades on needed personal matters, including those extremely doubtful, from
viewpoint of the law.”

Zenon Zawada: The alleged
audio recordings seem authentic to us since the types of conversations held,
amounting to about an hour’s worth, would be difficult to conjure and redact.
Moreover, Sytnyk would have had little incentive for doing so considering all
the risks involved. The Aug. 3 ruling is significant because it marks the first
time the judges of an influential court are being criminally investigated. Even
these basic first steps, the investigations and notices of suspicion/criminal
charges, would not have been accomplished without the National Anti-Corruption
Bureau, whose authority has been enhanced with 2019 launch of the High
Anti-Corruption Court. And these institutions would not have emerged without
cooperation with the IMF.

Just as significant is Zelensky’s silence and inaction
since the notices were issued. At minimum, it indicates his inability or
unwillingness to undertake the fight against corruption (similar to his
predecessor). But given that he is reported to have met with Liubovych
personally and removed him from the investigation, this could be the latest
evidence of his adopting the adage, “If you can’t beat them, join them.”

Zelensky is hoping this incident will blow over, just
as the embarrassing audio recordings of the brother of his office head allegedly offering government posts for bribes.
But this incident is far more serious since it affects Ukraine’s struggling
judiciary, in which the West has invested millions to fix. And this particular
court has made numerous scandalous rulings, including such crucial geopolitical
matters as rejecting the nationalization of Privatbank. So while the Ukrainian
public might not grasp the significance of these corruption allegations,
Western officials are certain to be highly disturbed by these reports and
expecting actions from Zelensky.