Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
“Sternenko pointed out shortcomings in the work of international experts in selecting VAC judges”⚖️
This is exactly the kind of headline Ukrainska Pravda might use, quoting Sternenko’s dissatisfaction with the actions of a VAC judge who stated that the practice of using charity as a tool to avoid liability for corruption crimes is unacceptable.
https://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2026/10/05/8056560
‼️But this judge was just selected by international experts. So did they make a mistake? Or is there something else going on❓
The trigger was a decision by VAC judge Iryna Teslenko, who refused to approve an agreement between the SAP and MP from the banned OPZZh Oleksandr Kachnyi (suspected of illicit enrichment of 13 million UAH). Under that agreement the deputy was to transfer 3 million UAH to the “Come Back Alive” fund.
☝️However, behind the loud media outrage lies a much deeper and systemic problem: the inadmissibility of buying freedom for serious corruption crimes through charity.
The anti-corruption vertical (NABU, SAP, VAC) was created by society and international partners clearly not so that wealthy criminals would obtain a legal instrument to “buy off” justice.
⚖️Why is Judge Iryna Teslenko’s position absolutely correct and fair?
1️⃣A sense of total injustice. The practice “stole millions — donated a percentage — free” destroys society’s faith in the law. It creates a parallel reality where for the wealthy prison is replaced by an ordinary “corruption tax.”
2️⃣Lack of verification of the origin of funds. No one properly checks the money a corrupt person tries to use to buy their freedom. This creates a vicious circle: the suspect can pay the state or funds with the same dirty money they stole.
3️⃣Issue of control. The judge quite logically noted that such voluntary contributions lie outside the control of the court and the signatories to the agreement within the criminal process.
This case again raises the painful question: why is there no unified practice in our judicial system? Some VAC judges decisively reject such agreements, defending the interests of justice, while others approve similar agreements, allowing defendants to avoid real terms.
💰Could there be a fee for a court to approve such agreements?
🇺🇦Charity and support for the Armed Forces — these are the sacred duty of honest citizens, not an indulgence for those who plundered the country for years.
🔥No one forbade deputy Kachnyi or any other defendant from making a charitable donation to the “Come Back Alive” fund, but do they want to do it not as payment for their freedom?
‼️The VAC judge’s position in this case is an important step toward genuine, not “facade,” rule of law.
❗️OFFICE OF PURIFICATION ⚖️ SEND NEWS
🚀 Read more on our FaceBook…
Telegram publication
