On January 28, members of the High Council of Justice adjourned consideration of disciplinary proceedings against the judges of Dniprovskyy district court of Kyiv Mykola Chaus based on the findings of the Interim Commission for audit of judges of general jurisdiction courts. The case was institutedon the appeal of a citizen Valtyschev whom judge Chaus illegally deprived of driving license for six months. The decisionon adjournment was made due to the need to clarify the circumstances of issuance of the ruling on Valtyschev in Dniprovskyy district court and reclamation of the original file of the administrative case for review at a meeting of the HCJ.
“Reclamation of the proceedings materials is only an excuse, a simple delay,” said lawyer Andriy Bohdan, who represented Valtyschev. He noted that previously the HCJ had all the necessary materials for decisionwhen considering disciplinary proceedings against Chaus.
According to the lawyer, members of the HCJ reclaimed the case of Mykola Chaus, in particular, through much attention of journalists and the public pressure under which the Council of Justice simply did not dare undo disciplinary proceedings against the judge in front of the whole country endured unlawful decision.
Andriy Bohdan also noted that, according to estimates, almost half the members of the HCJ was against the dismissal of Mykola Chaus, as was under the influence of various stakeholders, who also gave the go-ahead to adjourn proceedings over Chaus. "Further the HCJ will be sent additional materials on crimes committed by Mykola Chaus,” the defender assured.
The HCJmeeting was attended by the MPs Didych Valentine, AndriyDenysenko and Oleksandr Dubinin and lawyers of Hennadiy Korban, who intended to give HCJmembers additional evidence on the misconduct of Judge Chaus, in particular, in the case of Korban. However, members of the High Council of Justice refused to enter into the case file their written submissions and hear oral testimony, citing the fact that they are not related to the review.
During the HCJ meeting, lawyer Andriy Bohdan asked the HCJ to speak not only about the subject of consideration, but also about other circumstances that characterize the personality of Judge Chaus. It was the decision of Mykola Chausto allow investigators to remove materials from other criminal proceedings and about the alleged “serious illness” of the judge, which prevented him to come to the disciplinary proceedings on 17 December 2015 on his own case, but did not prevent him to hear the case of Hennadiy Korban for over 30 hours in 7 days.
He also said that by his rulings in Korban’s case he earns the right to continue to be a judge avoiding dismissals for unlawful decisions regarding the Revolution of Dignity.
Note that today Kyiv Court of Appeal, having considered the issue of determining the jurisdiction of Oleg Martynov’s case, a suspect in the case of Korban, decided to send it for review to Dniprovskyy district court of Kyiv, where Judge Chaus considered the case of Hennady Korban and Michael Koshlyak, who was detained in the case of the politician. Igor Martynov’s lawyer Cherezov said he would not be surprised if the case of his client will be assigned to Judge Chaus.
