The High Council of Justice issued a reprimand to a judge from Boryspil over rulings in drunk driving cases
The Second Disciplinary Chamber of the High Council of Justice brought disciplinary charges against Serhiy Voznyuk, a judge of the Boryspil City and District Court in Kyiv Oblast. He received a reprimand and was stripped of his right to receive a salary supplement for one month.
The disciplinary case concerned the adjudication of cases involving driving under the influence. During the review of 28 court decisions, the Disciplinary Chamber found instances of unjustified application of provisions regarding minor offenses, as well as cases where the judge failed to take into account repeat offenses and did not revoke drivers’ licenses even when blood alcohol levels were high.
The High Council of Justice also drew attention to the practice of considering voluntary contributions to the Armed Forces of Ukraine as a mitigating circumstance and the use of certain expert opinions conducted in violation of established procedures.
The judge himself stated that he acted within the bounds of his discretionary powers, taking into account the circumstances of each case, and emphasized the need for an individualized approach when imposing penalties.
Source: High Council of Justice.
According to a response from Lilia Yakimyak, deputy head of the Secretariat of the High Council of Justice, to a related journalistic inquiry, no exact timeline has been provided for the completion of the review of the disciplinary complaint against Volodymyr Yaroslavovych Marmash, a judge of the Lychakiv District Court of Lviv. Such a prolonged delay in reviewing the complaint may be a demonstration of collusion and a reluctance to hold accountable a “convenient” judge who willingly carries out tasks assigned by unethical law enforcement officials.
The complaint against Marmash is that he issued his ruling after the deadline for the pretrial investigation had already expired, thereby making it impossible to grant the relevant motion. The only lawful option in such a situation was to return the motion; however, Judge V.Y. Marmash failed to comply with the requirements of the law.
