MENU
Documenting
war crimes in Ukraine

The Tribunal for Putin (T4P) global initiative was set up in response to the all-out war launched by Russia against Ukraine in February 2022.

Similar articles

Court case thrown out over clear signs that police planted evidencePlans to decriminalize possession of drugsThe Fight against drug abuse hits cancer patientsECHR finds Ukraine in violation over life prisoner tortured into confessing to somebody else’s crime Ukraine to leave European Ombudsman in protest over Ukrainian children being sent from Austria to Russia A brief description of the KHPG strategic litigations in July–December 2020The practice of application of Article 111 of the Criminal Code of UkraineA brief description of the KHPG strategic litigations in January – June 2020A brief description of KHPG strategic litigations in July–December 2019A brief description of KHPG strategic litigations in January–June 2018Russia pushes lies and defamation while hiding Sentsov who is reportedly very weakOn 40th day of Sentsov hunger strike, doctors say crisis imminent, refuting lies from Russia’s OmbudsmanA brief description of KHPG strategic litigations in January–December 2017A brief description of KHPG strategic litigations in January - June 2017Russian Human Rights Ombudsperson thinks jailing Crimean rights lawyer Kurbedinov & seizing his clients’ records is OKTop anti-corruption post for persecutor of well-known Ukrainian human rights activist?Why Ukraine acquits 10 times less often than in Stalin’s Soviet UnionNew Russian Ombudsperson sees no political prisoners in Russia, only ‘extremists’New „jury” trial in Ukraine – first assessmentsIn the area of human rights. Overview

Important acquittal due to police and prosecution infringements

14.08.2014   
A Mykolaiv court has found a person not guilty of supplying cannabis, with the ruling passed because of the infringements at investigation level made by both the police and the prosecutor.

On July 30 the Central District Court in Mykolaiv found a person not guilty of supplying cannabis, with the ruling passed because of the infringements at investigation level made by both the police and the prosecutor.  In its judgment, the court directly cites the European Convention on Human Rights and European Court of Human Rights case law. 

The court found that the police had gathered evidence against defendant N. in breach of legislation and international norms.

Defence lawyer Ihor Skalko calls the case a milestone.  The attitude of judges to the justice system is changing, he says, adding that this is the first time he has seen a judge examine a case so professionally. Despite the fact that the accused had confessed since he didn’t expect a just ruling and had asked for the case to be examined according to simplified procedure, the judge nonetheless insisted on a full examination.

The judge unusually demanded confirmation of the personal data of anonymous witnesses.  Judges usually accept a superficial explanation from the police and prosecutor.

Having analysed the case material, the court established that at the moment of the alleged purchase by the police, there were no serious grounds for suspecting N. of selling drugs.  The material gathered at pre-trial stage did not show any sign that N. sold drugs, but only used them. During the operational purchase the police had put pressure on the purchaser and on the accused to commit the crime.   When the court asked to question the witnesses to check whether there had been provocation, the prosecution unlawfully refused to provide information about the main witnesses – the purchasers.  This all served as grounds for acquitting the defendant.

Skalko is one of the lawyers working for the All-Ukrainian Legal Aid Network for Drug Addicts and People Living with HIV, a project supported by the International Renaissance Foundation. 

 Share this