[ad_1]
The Supreme Court of Ukraine sent a complaint to the High Council of Justice, in which it indicated that, in her statements on the case of the contributions of businessmen Igor and Hryhoriy Surkisov to PrivatBank, the Attorney General Irina Venediktova actually compared the judiciary with society and the state in general.
The Supreme Court of Ukraine (AFU) considers the statement of the Attorney General Irina Venediktova in the case of the deposits of the brothers Igor and Hryhoriy Surkisov in PrivatBank as interference in the court. This is stated in the complaint, sent by the Supreme Court to the High Council of Justice and published on May 4.
On April 23, Venediktova stated that in this case the Attorney General’s Office defends UAH 1 billion of state assets from PrivatBank. “This matter in its importance is not a simple argument. The decision made by the court will be of great importance to ensure the development of the law and the formation of a unified police practice when considering other claims related to the nationalization of PrivatBank. After all, this lawsuit is just a drop in the bucket of similar ones: the total number of lawsuits against the state in such cases amounts to more than 29 billion UAH. ” – The attorney general pointed out then.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces consider that with this statement Venediktova “actually opposed the judiciary against society and the state as a whole.”
“From the speech, one has the feeling that the only defender of society and the state is the prosecutor who has already determined who is right in this case and who is not. In conditions in which, around this case, it is Obviously there is an incitement to civil sentiment and attempts to humiliate the court, such statements can hardly be considered acceptable, “the judges said.
The complaint also mentions allegations. in this case party “Democrat Sokira “and its founders, who in particular called the purchased judges and one of the members of the PrivatBank Supervisory Board.
The judges of the Ukrainian Armed Forces consider these circumstances to be a form of interference in the court’s activities, a method of influence and pressure to make a decision in favor of one of the parties.
Entrepreneurs Igor and Grigory Surkisy, as well as their family members, are suing PrivatBank for deposits totaling more than 1 billion UAH. By decision of the National Bank of Ukraine of December 13, 2016 Surkis were recognized by insiders “PrivatBank”. The NBU indicated that Igor Surkis and the former owner of the bank Igor Kolomoisky are shareholders of the 1 + 1 television channel, which testifies to Surkisov’s connection with PrivatBank. In this sense, during the nationalization of bank money withSurkisov’s families and their companies in the deposit accounts of PrivatBank and its branches became the bank’s capital as part of the rescue procedure. Groundhogs dispute this procedure.
In May 2017, the Kiev District Administrative Court declared the NBU commission’s decision to recognize the Surkisov family as related to PrivatBank illegal and reversed. In November 2017, the Kiev Administrative Court of Appeals confirmed this decision. PrivatBank, NBU and the Ministry of Finance disagreed with him and filed an appeal before the Supreme Court of Appeals.
Due to judicial reform, the case was transferred to the Supreme Court of Ukraine in 2018; in January 2019, it was accepted for consideration. The Ukrainian Armed Forces noted that the hearings were postponed many times, in the process, at the request of the parties’ representatives, breaks were announced. The next meeting was scheduled for April 27, 2020, but was postponed because the court declared pressure, the agency “Interfax-Ukraine”.
On May 5, the National Bank of Ukraine informed Facebook that the consideration of the case in the Armed Forces will resume on May 18, the meeting will begin at 10:30.
[ad_2]
