In the summer of 2015, the chairman of the Kiev Court of Appeal, Anton Chernushenko, was accused of interfering with the work of the court’s automated document flow system and making unfair decisions. His son Dmitry was assigned the role of instigator - as if he sent requests and instructions on specific matters to his father on his mobile phone.
At the time of the announcement of suspicion, the son of Judge Chernushenko worked as the chief consultant of the department for processing constitutional appeals of the Legal Expertise Department of the Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine
From November 2014 to June 2015, the appeal court received eight complaints against the decisions of the Pechersky District Court of Kyiv. All of them related to the disappearance of the former head of the board of Neftegazdobycha Oleg Seminsky, which was investigated by the Department for Particularly Important Cases of the Prosecutor General’s Office.
In February 2012, Seminsky was kidnapped by masked men near his own home. The incident was being investigated as a possible murder to take over his 10% stake in the company. In 2014-2015, GPU investigator Dmitry Sus initiated the seizure of Neftegazdobycha property and the presentation of suspicions to persons whom other co-owners of the company could have ordered the kidnapping of Seminsky.
Chernushenko, as the chairman of the court, for selfish reasons, allegedly instructed court employees to interfere with the automatic distribution of cases, and to appoint him as the presiding officer for the consideration of appeals.
Based on the results of the consideration of appeals, the decisions to take the suspects into custody, as well as to seize the property of Neftegazdobycha, were canceled.
Chernushenko’s activities were stopped when GPU investigator Dmitry Sus entered his office with a search and literally snatched the newly prepared draft decision in the Neftegazdobycha case from the hands of the judge.
Controlled case distribution system
Initially, investigators assumed that interference in the automatic distribution of cases in the Kyiv Court of Appeal was not an isolated case, but a constant practice.
And, allegedly, this is why the court management abandoned the Automated Court Document Management System (D-3) software developed by the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine. Instead, the development of its own software was ordered, the developer of which was the Softline company. The system was developed and installed in the courthouse, but GSA refused to pay Softline for its maintenance.
Therefore, Chernushenko decided in the SCA the issue of appointing several employees of the Softline company to positions in the State Enterprise “Judicial Construction Expert Center”, which falls under the management of the SCA of Ukraine and is engaged in the maintenance and servicing of the premises of the Kyiv Court of Appeal. In addition, the leadership of the Kyiv Court of Appeal allegedly promised Softline employees additional payment using their own means of servicing the mentioned system.
According to the investigation, Chernushenko and his deputies gave a list of cases that needed to be distributed to supervised judges to the head of the court apparatus, who was the authorized representative of the court chairman; he handed over the lists of cases to former employees of the Softline company, who had full access, including remote access via the network “Internet”, to an automated document flow system, courts assigned cases to a specific judge.
The investigation is on pause
After the suspicion was announced, Chernushenko did not wait for arrest and disappeared. According to law enforcement officials, he left for Russia. While on the wanted list, the judge published a video message on the Internet, talking about the illegal wiretapping of diplomatic missions and embassies on the territory of Ukraine. Chernushenko called his criminal case a reprisal on the part of Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, who was a former co-owner of Neftegazdobycha.
Chernushenko’s son was released from the pre-trial detention center, having paid 6 million hryvnia bail, and subsequently received another suspicion - of inciting the disclosure of state secrets. According to investigators, after the scandal with his father, in July 2016, he conspired with a senior consultant of the first department of the Kiev Court of Appeal to sell information about permission to conduct covert investigative search actions to interested parties for $2,000.
The court employee pleaded guilty, namely that he photographed the application of the SBU investigator and the ruling of the Court of Appeal judge to authorize the NSRD. These investigative actions were carried out in criminal proceedings, in which the head of the Seaports Administration Andrei Amelin was suspected of embezzling 3.5 million hryvnia for the purchase of fuels and lubricants.
In 2017, a former employee of the Kyiv Court of Appeal received a suspended 5-year prison sentence by agreement. The materials on Chernushenko Jr. were also sent to court, but the process dragged on.
The investigation into the case of interference in the system of automatic distribution of cases has also slowed down - officially due to the search for both Judge Chernushenko and his son. GPU investigator Dmitry Sus, who searched the judge’s office, was himself prosecuted and fired from his position.
For 5 years and 6 months, the investigation into the case of Judge Chernushenko was stopped for 4 years and 8 months due to his search. In the son’s case, the investigation lasted about 4.5 years, of which more than 3 years were on pause, also in connection with the search.
If you believe the defense, then the duration of the investigation was formal and pursued other goals, namely the creation of a deceptive public opinion regarding the suspects.
But for Judge Chernushenko’s son, things probably weren’t entirely bad. Because it was only on paper that he was a suspect and wanted.
In fact, in 2018-2019, the judge’s son led a very public lifestyle in Kyiv - he was a frequent guest on television in the “Everyone Concerns” program, acted as a physiognomist and hypnotherapist, and also conducted psychological trainings. Therefore, the reality of law enforcement efforts to find him looks more than doubtful.
While the pre-trial investigation was stopped, no evidence was collected. Five years later, when the lawyer asked to close the case, it turned out that the initial version of the investigation was not only not confirmed, but also fell apart. Two witnesses reported that interference in the work of the automated document management system of the Kyiv Court of Appeal occurred on the instructions of the head of the court apparatus, and the latter seemed to confirm such witness testimony. But the head of the court staff did not become suspicious.
In October 2019, the case against Chernushenko Jr. was closed due to the lack of evidence and the exhaustion of all opportunities to obtain it.
In 2020, former judge Chernushenko personally appeared in the Pechersk court with his lawyers to appeal the investigator’s inaction. In January 2021, the case against him was also closed.
After this, the father and son filed lawsuits against the state, demanding compensation.
Anton Chernushenko has already gone through three instances and in October last year the Supreme Court awarded him 750 thousand hryvnia in moral compensation. In December, the Pechersky Court of Kyiv agreed to recover 636 thousand hryvnia for his son.
The minimum amount of moral damage is determined based on the amount of wages at the time the case is considered by the court, for each month of stay under investigation and trial. At the time of filing the claim, the minimum salary was 6,000 hryvnia and the minimum compensation for 4.5 years of persecution for Chernushenko Jr. could have been about 300 thousand hryvnia. But Chernushenko was awarded twice as much.
The court explained that it considers this amount sufficient and correct, taking into account the length of the plaintiff’s stay under investigation and trial, repeated searches both at his place of work and at his place of residence, damage to business reputation, public outcry, interference in his personal life, which resulted in termination marriage to his wife (current judge of the Desnyansky Court of Kyiv).
Chernushenko Jr., as it turned out, in 2015-2016 applied for the position of judge of the Fastovsky city district court of the Kyiv region. But after suspicion was raised, the High Council of Justice did not approve his candidacy.
But the court did not see any evidence of Chernushenko’s dismissal from work and non-appointment as a judge precisely because of criminal charges.
The High Council of Justice, refusing to submit a proposal to the President of Ukraine for the appointment of Chernushenko to the position of judge of the Fastovsky City District Court of the Kiev Region, proceeded from the fact that the candidate did not have the required 3 years of experience in the field of law after receiving a higher legal education.
The Office of the Prosecutor General completely denied the claims, noting that the investigation lasted so long due to the fault of the suspects themselves, who were hiding.
However, the Supreme Court believes that a forced break in the investigation does not change the fact that the person is under investigation, and therefore compensation is charged for the entire period.
Now the son of ex-judge Chernushenko has one more criminal proceeding regarding the disclosure of state secrets - the transfer to outsiders of copies of petitions and court rulings on the conduct of the NSRD - remaining unclosed.
The Solomensky District Court of Kyiv stopped the consideration of this case in March 2023. The lawyer submitted a certificate from the military unit that his client has been mobilized into the armed forces since March 17, 2022.
