Volodymyr Babenko elected court chairman for third consecutive term

The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed a cassation appeal filed by judge of the Court of Appeal of Cherkasy region Serhiy Bondarenko, in which he challenged the election of Volodymyr Babenko as the chairman of the Court for the third consecutive term.

The Human Rights Information Centre correspondent reports this from the courtroom.

“The court ruled to dismiss the cassation appeal, filed by judge of the Court of Appeal of Cherkasy region Serhiy Bondarenko, and uphold the judgment of the Cherkasy District Administrative Court and the Kyiv Administrative Court of Appeal,” judge Yuri Cherpak read out the opening part of the judgment.

Roman Maselko, the lawyer of judge Serhiy Bondarenko, describes the court’s ruling as foreseeable.

“Personally I did not believe that the current judicial system could apply the interpretation which would be obvious to the whole of society. One and the same person cannot hold such important positions indefinite number of times in a democratic society,” the lawyer said in the commentary to the Centre.

As reported, judge of the Court of Appeal of Cherkasy region Serhiy Bondarenko asked the judges in the lower judicial instances to recognize unlawful the decision of the judges’ meeting on the election of Volodymyr Babenko as the chairman of the Court.

In his complaint he refers to a number of violations which took place during the meeting of the judges of the Court of Appeal and during consideration of the case in lower instances. In particular, he points out that he could not fully participate in the meeting of the judges as he considered the lawsuit at that time.

Serhiy Bondarenko believes that it is impossible to count the number of judges, present at the meeting, on the basis of the evidence, provided by the defendants.

During the court hearing, judge Bondarenko said that he had not put forward his candidacy for the post of chairman of the court.

As a reminder, judge Serhiy Bondarenko experienced systematic pressure and interference in his work as a judge after he had refused to deliver unlawful judgment at the request of Volodymyr Babenko.