Ex-prosecutor from Odessa, who was suspected of bribery, was denied reinstatement

Former employee of the prosecutor's office in the military and defense sector of the Southern region, Alexander Rosinsky, who was released from punishment for bribery, lost his lawsuits for reinstatement in the service.

The editors of 368.media learned about this from the decision of the Administrative Court of Cassation as part of the Supreme Court in case No. 420/8938/20.

After the lawyer was released from punishment, he tried to reinstate himself in the prosecutor's office. First, Rosinsky filed a lawsuit with the Odessa District Court, which rejected him. This was confirmed by the Fifth District Administrative Court by a ruling dated January 23, 2023. The final point was put by the cassation, which took place at the end of October.

In his lawsuit, Rosinsky noted that he had served in the military in the prosecutor’s office since September 2016 (we already wrote that he changed jobs and moved with his supervisor, already the chairman of the State Military Administration of the city of Kherson, Roman Mrochko).

The head of the military administration of Kherson was denied reinstatement as a military prosecutor.

On June 26, 2020, the SBI investigator handed the prosecutor a suspicion under Part 3 of Art. 368 CC. As you know, Rosinsky was previously detained for a bribe of 7.5 thousand dollars, which he received in two installments from exporters to a special account.

Further, the prosecutor was informed of the need for temporary release from office and transfer to the disposal of the military prosecutor for the duration of the pre-trial investigation. Rosinsky stated in the lawsuit that, being in a depressed emotional state, he filed a corresponding report. By order No. 597k of July 6, the plaintiff was relieved of his position as a prosecutor and placed at the disposal of the military prosecutor of the Southern region, and by order of the acting military prosecutor on August 17, he was fired and sent for military registration at the Primorsky RTCC and SP of Odessa. Rosinsky stated in court that at that time he was temporarily disabled, and therefore he could not be dismissed from his position.

A representative of the special prosecutor's office of the Southern region stated that the prosecutor was dismissed from his position on June 6, and not on August 14, as was erroneously stated in the statement of claim. Rosinsky was a serviceman seconded to government agencies, remaining in military service with an appointment to the post of military prosecutor. After his dismissal, he continued to perform military service under a contract concluded with the Ministry of Defense. The plaintiff independently submitted a report on his dismissal from military service to the reserve on the basis of subparagraph “d” of paragraph 2 of part 5 of Art. 26 of the Law “On Military Duty and Military Service”, in connection with staff reductions or organizational measures, followed by dismissal from the prosecutor’s office.

The court considers the plaintiff's arguments that he did not write or submit the said report to be groundless and refuted by the plaintiff himself in the claim. That is, the plaintiff independently confirms the fact of writing a report on his release from his position and his transfer to the disposal of the military prosecutor, which refutes his further statements about the failure to write the said report.

The Court of Cassation decided to reject the claim to the specialized prosecutor's office in the military and defense sector of the Southern region to declare the order unlawful and cancel the order, reinstatement, and recovery of average earnings for the period of forced absence.