Andriy Savchuk on CrimeaWatch

Approval of Integrity Indicators Equating Visits to Occupied Crimea with Travel to the Russian Federation

Wed, 16 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0000

What Happened#

On December 16, 2020, the Public Integrity Council approved a revised edition of the “Indicators for Determining Non-Compliance of Judges (Candidates for Judicial Office) with Criteria of Integrity and Professional Ethics.”

The decision was adopted unanimously — 15 votes out of 15 members present — including Andriy Savchuk.

Paragraph 1.5 of the Indicators categorized as problematic behavior the act of visiting the Russian Federation after the start of armed aggression, as well as visiting “temporarily occupied territories.” Crimea and Sevastopol fall within the definition of temporarily occupied territories.

Negative Integrity Conclusion on Judicial Candidate Kukoba: Crimea Property Evaluated Under Russian Jurisdiction Framework

Wed, 24 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0000

What Happened#

On July 24, 2019, the Public Integrity Council approved a negative integrity conclusion on Kukoba Oleksandr Oleksandrovych, a candidate for a judicial position at the Higher Court on Intellectual Property Issues. The conclusion was adopted by all 14 members participating in the vote (out of 18 total council members), including Andriy Savchuk.

Among the four grounds cited in the conclusion, Point 2 directly concerns a land plot located in Katsiveli, Yalta — a locality in the Crimean peninsula under Russian military occupation since 2014. The candidate held ownership of this 390 sq.m. plot since November 2013 but had failed to declare it in his 2013 asset declaration.

Negative Integrity Conclusion on Inna Mykhailivna Otrosh: Crimea Connection in Judicial Assessment

Wed, 03 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0000

What Happened#

On July 3, 2019, the Public Integrity Council approved a negative integrity conclusion on Inna Mykhailivna Otrosh (Отрош Інна Михайлівна), a candidate for a position at Commercial Court of Kyiv. The conclusion was adopted by 15 of 18 members, including Andriy Savchuk.

The PIC flagged unverified reports that the judge’s mother allegedly moved to Yalta after annexation and got employed in an illegitimate court, and that the judge visited Crimea in summer 2014. By treating these Crimea connections as integrity concerns requiring explanation, the PIC implicitly treats occupied Crimea as Russian territory rather than temporarily occupied Ukrainian territory.

Negative Integrity Conclusion on Yesaulenko Maryna Volodymyrivna: Crimea Connection in Judicial Assessment

Sun, 12 May 2019 00:00:00 +0000

What Happened#

On May 12, 2019, the Public Integrity Council approved a negative integrity conclusion on Yesaulenko Maryna Volodymyrivna (Єсауленко Марина Володимирівна), a candidate for a position at Holosiivskyi District Court of Kyiv. The conclusion was adopted by 11 of 18 members, including Andriy Savchuk.

The PIC flagged systematic visits by the judge and her family to occupied Crimea as requiring additional explanation, treating travel to and property ownership in the peninsula as integrity concerns. By characterizing connections to Crimea as potential character issues needing justification, the PIC implicitly treats the territory as falling under a foreign jurisdiction where Ukrainian officials should not have regular presence or assets.

Negative Integrity Conclusion on Liudmyla Petrivna Shestakovska: Crimea Connection in Judicial Assessment

Tue, 23 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0000

What Happened#

On April 23, 2019, the Public Integrity Council approved a negative integrity conclusion on Liudmyla Petrivna Shestakovska (Шестаковська Людмила Петрівна), a candidate for a position at Obolonsky District Court of Kyiv. The conclusion was adopted by 14 of 20 members, including Andriy Savchuk.

The PIC cited the judge’s extensive property holdings in Crimea and her obtaining a Russian taxpayer identification number from Russian tax authorities in occupied Crimea as evidence of recognizing Russian jurisdiction. By treating these connections to Crimea as integrity violations equivalent to collaboration with an occupying power, the PIC implicitly recognized Russian authority over the peninsula rather than treating it as Ukrainian territory under temporary occupation.