While the drama around Nadia Savchenko and the fight to get her released are going on, no less interesting and important trial is being held in Kyiv, with Hennadii Korban in the dock. Given the nature and shape of the case, this high-profile story is increasingly becoming another illustrative example of the state of the Ukrainian judiciary.
Observing the Savchenko case being tried in the Russian city of Rostov-on-Don, many people probably drew comparisons with Ukrainian courts. While we say that the Savchenko case reflects absence of a fair judiciary in Russia and its subservience to the government’s orders, unfortunately, the Korban case reflects less than well on the Ukrainian judiciary and prosecution system as well.
On March 11, the Kyiv Court of Appeal adjourned the next hearing in the Korban case till 10:30 a.m., March 14, when it will deal with a motion challenging an extension of his detention. The court granted the motion by the UKROP party’s leader’s lawyer Oleksandr Lysak, who said during the hearing that the parties needed to wait for information on the health status of his client. The attorney already sent a lawyer’s request to the Amosov Institute and director of the Heart Institute Borys Todurov, asking them to provide the medical consultation report on Korban’s health.
Earlier, the Dniprovsky District Court of Kyiv extended Korban’s preventive detention until April 15. Let us recall that Korban is being investigated over his role in Dnipropetrovsk kidnappings of chairman of the State Land Agency of Ukraine and head of a department of the city council, creating and participating in a criminal organization, large-scale misappropriation of funds in the Fund of National Defense charity and obstruction of election commissions’ work.
In fact, the problem is much deeper. And it concerns not only personally Korban, but the system of political relations which has developed in Ukraine over many years as well. Let us draw a parallel.
Very tellingly, hearings in the Korban case are held in the same courtroom where the high-profile Gongadze-Podolsky case’s chief perpetrator Oleksii Pukach was tried. The only differences are that a metal defendant cage has been replaced with a plastic one, judges are naturally different, and attendance at the Korban case hearings is much higher.
An important episode. We have repeatedly observed how hired thugs come to the Korban case hearings, occupy almost all available seats and violate public order. And you know what? This element of the current judiciary is not a new phenomenon. Previously, such thugs were brought to the hearing of the High Council of Justice which dealt with the case of Kuchma family’s very own judge, notorious falsifier of evidence Andrii Melnyk. It was only after victim in the Gongadze case Oleksii Podolsky and his legal representative Oleksandr Yeliashkevych raised a scandal that the unknown people had left the meeting room.
The Gongadze-Podolsky case is a long-standing and internationally notorious example, symbolizing not only the state of the Ukrainian judiciary, but the quality of politics and journalism in our country as well. It is precisely because there has been no closure to this case regarding those who ordered the crimes that cases like the Korban one are still possible in Ukraine. The system created during the Kuchma administration has been refusing to provide answers in the Gongadze-Podolsky case for 17 years already, even as presidents, prime ministers, and prosecutors general changed. Firstly, this case is its symbol, and secondly, the system itself is still here: two Maidan protests have shaken but not eliminated it.
“Thank God that the passions have calmed down a little,” Mayor of Dnipropetrovsk Borys Filatov commented for The Day. “The trial has been transformed from a mad confrontation into a more logical proceeding. I came to offer moral support to my friend and convey greetings from his hometown, where people remember and wait for him. Questionable actions are being taken not only against Korban, but also against other patriots, they are just less well-known. We have trials everywhere. It is not only Korban whom the system tries to destroy. This is just the tip of the iceberg,” (the interview with Filatov will be published in coming issues of The Day).
President Petro Poroshenko said earlier that the Korban case was not political in nature, called for a transparent investigation and stated that the country would soon learn new names of those who would be held accountable. However, the public’s and experts’ main concern is precisely the selective approach: people agree that those guilty should be brought to justice if evidence against them is available, but based on Korban’s arrest’s circumstances as well as those of the trial itself, and most importantly, the lack of any such trials for those guilty of crimes committed during the Euromaidan and collaboration, the Korban case is looking very much like a political one.
