[ad_1]
Oleksandr Tupitskiy, the head of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, removed from office, must admit that ethically he cannot be the head of the Constitutional Court or a judge. This was stated by the adviser to the head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, Mikhail Podolyak.
The refusal of the Supreme Court to initiate a process on the removal of the president of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, Oleksandr Tupitsky, is “very eloquent”. On February 3, the adviser to the head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, Mikhail Podolyak, said this in a comment to NV.
“Tupitsky is very ugly, trying to reproduce in some way the reality to which he has been led. Ethically, he can no longer be the president of the Constitutional Court or the judge of the Constitutional Court,” said the adviser.
According to Podolyak, the sooner Tupitsky admits it, the better it will be for everyone.
“No machinations and attempts at appeal will not help him,” said the adviser to the head of the OPU.
On February 1, the Supreme Court received Tupitsky’s lawsuit against the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, Tupitsky challenged his dismissal. On February 3, the Supreme Court refused to open a process. The court noted that the jurisdiction of the administrative courts does not extend to cases referred to the jurisdiction of the CCU.
On December 28, 2020, the Attorney General’s Office sent Zelensky a petition to remove Tupitsky from the post of judge of the Constitutional Court for a period of two months, and on December 29, the head of state signed the corresponding decree.
On December 30, the KSU released a statement emphasizing that it would not remove Tupitsky from office, despite Zelensky’s decree. The Constitutional Court said that Zelensky’s decree does not comply with the Constitution, as it does not give the president the right to remove judges from the Constitutional Court. Furthermore, the Constitution does not provide for the possibility of removing a judge from the Constitutional Court from office, according to the court.
The presidential representative in the KSU Fedor Venislavsky believes that the president has the right to remove Tupitsky. He said that such powers of the head of state are provided for in the Code of Criminal Procedure.
On January 19, the KSU announced that State Security Department employees would not allow Tupitsky to enter the courthouse. The KSU noted that, although he was removed from his post as a judge of the Constitutional Court, he should preside over the court. Tupitskiy filed a complaint with Ukraine’s attorney general, Irina Venediktova, because “she was neither actually nor legally informed of the suspected crimes.” On January 20, Tupitsky was again not allowed to work. According to him, he was not officially fired from his position and if he does not come to work, he will be credited with truancy. He appealed to the Kiev District Administrative Court.
Tupitsky is suspected of bribing a witness and misleading the court with knowingly false testimony from the witness. On December 28, 2020, he was supposed to appear at the Office of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine to present the suspicion. According to the Attorney General’s Office, Tupitsky said he could not come for family reasons, but did not provide documents on the validity of the reasons for the lack of appearance. A message of suspicion was sent to Tupitsky by mail. The State Investigations Office indicated that it received a suspicion report, although it denies it.
Journalists from the Scheme program (a joint project of Radio Svoboda and UA: Pershiy) reported that Tupitsky was involved in a lawsuit against the former head of the Supreme Economic Court Viktor Tatkov, who was suspected of taking over the assets of the Engineering Plant of Zuevsky energy. . According to journalists, Tupitsky had a shady role in the privatization of this plant.
[ad_2]
