The prosecutor of Cherkasy Oblast was summoned several times for a disability review
The Qualification and Disciplinary Commission for Prosecutors reviewed the case file regarding a prosecutor from the Cherkasy region who had been summoned four times for a review of his Group II disability status, as determined by the Medical and Social Expert Commission. Based on the results of the review, the commission decided to impose a disciplinary penalty. The details of the case and the QDC’s conclusions are not being fully disclosed.
The Commission held Kostyantyn Tyshchenko, a prosecutor with the Cherkasy Regional Prosecutor’s Office, disciplinarily liable for failing to undergo a medical examination in a timely manner as part of the review of MSEC decisions regarding officials.
The basis for this was his failure to appear at the medical facility despite official summonses in 2024–2025. The commission established that, after being duly notified, he did not show up for the examination for a long time and only appeared in November 2025.
The prosecutor attributed the delays to medical treatment, business trips, and family circumstances, as well as caring for his ailing mother. He acknowledged that he had partially failed to meet the requirements on time but insisted on objective reasons.
The Commission concluded that the violation was of a persistent nature and had not been properly remedied within the specified timeframes. At the same time, it took into account that some of the reasons for his failure to appear were related to valid circumstances.
According to the decision of the Qualification and Disciplinary Commission, the prosecutor is prohibited for one year from transferring to higher-level prosecutorial bodies and holding higher positions, reports the Judicial and Legal Newspaper.
In Chernivtsi, law enforcement officials are investigating a possible scheme involving the embezzlement of budget funds during the procurement of quadcopters for military unit A7035. Criminal proceedings have been opened under articles regarding abuse of official position and misappropriation of property.
Earlier, NABU and the SAPO expanded the circle of suspects in the corruption case at the Supreme Court
NABU explained how decisions regarding suspects are made.
