Pechersky District Court of Kyiv ruled to close the administrative proceedings against President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky, initiated on July 7 by Chairman of the National Agency for Corruption Prevention (NACP) Oleksandr Novikov in connection with the failure to submit a report on significant changes in property status.
“Proceedings in the case of the administrative offense is to be closed on the basis of paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Article 247 of the Code of Administrative Offenses [Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses] due to his acts did not constitute an administrative offence,” the court said in the decision on case No. 757/28800/20-p, released in the Unified Register of Court Decisions.
According to the document, Zelensky did not report any changes in property status after he received income on July 10, 2019 in the form of a return of the par value of government domestic loan bonds.
The court said that the president is a subject covered by the law on the prevention of corruption, however, according to Article 105 of the Constitution, he has the right of presidential immunity during the exercise of his powers, and a criminal case cannot be initiated against him.
The court also refers to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, according to which a person brought to administrative responsibility is faced with a “criminal charge” in its autonomous understanding of the European Court of Human Rights, which must be interpreted by the following three criteria: taking into account the qualifications of the examination from the point of view of domestic law, its essence and nature, the severity of the potential punishment.
“Under these circumstances, taking into account the standards that the Convention establishes for criminal proceedings, the court concludes that when drawing up a protocol on an administrative offense under Part 2 of Article 172-6 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, a criminal charge has been brought forward. Therefore, taking into account the provisions of Article 105 of the Constitution of Ukraine of the above-mentioned case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, the court comes to the conclusion that a protocol on an administrative offense cannot be drawn up against the president of Ukraine during the exercise of his powers and he cannot be brought to an administrative responsibility,” the court said in the decision.
Taking these circumstances into account, the court concludes that the protocol drawn up against the President of Ukraine is inconsistent with the provisions of Article 105 of the Constitution of Ukraine, and therefore cannot be recognized as admissible evidence of an administrative offense event. In accordance with the requirements of clause 1 of Part 1 of Article 247 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, proceedings on an administrative offense cannot be initiated, and what has been started must be terminated in the absence of an event and an administrative offense.
