The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) did not allow NABU and SAPO to bring ex-Member of Parliament of Ukraine, one of the controllers of Zolotoy Mandaryn Oil LLC, to criminal liability for organizing of corruption scheme on embezzlement of more than UAH 54 million. The investigation gained enough evidence to give him a notice of suspicion, but because of his immunity as a close relative of the Judge of the ECHR, the law enforcement agencies needed permission from the ECHR to carry out the relevant procedural action.
We emphasize, that the ECHR decision of July 6, 2020, concerns only one of the persons involved in investigation, and actually makes it impossible to notify him of suspicion until the waiving of his immunity. At the same time, the pre-trial investigation as of other 6 participants of the corruption scheme is ongoing. Among suspects are: ex-Government Agent of Ukraine before the European Court of Human Rights; ex-First Deputy Minister of Justice of Ukraine; beneficiary of a private company; three persons close to the ex-MP. All these persons were given notices of suspicion, and the High Anti-Corruption Court chose them the measures of restraint.
It should be noted, that attempts to prosecute close relatives of the ECHR judges are rare. Such a practice did not exist in Ukraine at all. This situation complicated the work of the investigation, which ultimately influenced the essence of the decision taken by the ECHR on the relative of the Judge of this Court.
We will carefully analyse the ECHR decision and take into account its arguments in the investigation.
Read more about investigation here — https://bit.ly/2ZQ8cYt
According to Article 62 of the Constitution of Ukraine a person is considered not-guilty in commission of crime and cannot be a subject to criminal punishment, until he or she is found guilty by the court.