High Council of Justice upholds dismissal of judge who tried to hide in the Armed Forces

The High Council of Justice has upheld the motion of its first disciplinary chamber to dismiss a judge from Odesa region for committing a significant disciplinary offense.

According to the Center for Public Investigations, the HCJ made the decision on April 14.

The reason for this decision was the commission of a significant disciplinary offense. At the end of March 2025, the High Council of Justice granted the petition of the Deputy Head of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office Oleksandr Klymenko and allowed two judges of the Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi Court in Odesa Oblast to be taken into custody.

They are Valentyn Zaveriukha and Serhiy Savytskyi, who are suspected of organizing a scheme that allowed men to avoid mobilization allegedly because they needed to take care of a child. According to the investigation, it cost 3.5 thousand US dollars. According to preliminary estimates, Valentyn Zaveriukha made 124 such decisions, and Serhii Savytskyi - 312.

In December 2024, the High Council of Justice considered a petition filed by Valentyn Zaveriukha, a judge of the Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi City District Court of Odesa Oblast. He asked to suspend the disciplinary case against him, citing his mobilization to the Armed Forces.

The complaint against the judge was filed by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU). The complaint alleged disciplinary violations during the consideration of several court cases. Despite mobilization, the disciplinary chamber decided that the judge's participation in the case was possible.

In January 2024, the SBU, together with the NABU, detained a judge of the Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi Court of Odesa Oblast. According to the investigation, the judge took bribes of $3,500 for making decisions that allowed men of conscription age to avoid mobilization and go abroad.

The scheme was in place since April 2022. During this time, more than a thousand such decisions were issued. The court fictitiously assigned the place of residence of children to the men, which allowed them to receive a deferral from mobilization. The scheme involved court employees, a lawyer, and intermediaries. The lawyer searched for clients and passed on bribes.

Кирило Бойко