Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
We carefully reviewed the recording of the First Disciplinary Panel of the High Council of Justice regarding the judge-swindler from Poltava, Larysa Holnyk, against whom disciplinary action in the form of a submission for dismissal from the judicial office was applied.
Unfortunately, we were unable to track the progress of this disciplinary case online in real time due to the HCJ's violation of the relevant law provision regarding such broadcasting, so with a slight delay we will share our impressions of this proceeding.
The basis for opening the disciplinary case was a complaint from journalist and editor-in-chief of a print media outlet, citizen H.A. Sikalov, with whom the judge had formed hostile relations.
It turns out that this fraudster in a robe, illegally using her access to the Unified State Information and Telecommunication System for Courts (USITS) as a judge, obtained information about the complainant from court cases that were not before her, specifically about his personal family life, relationships with his ex-wife, his raising of his daughter, and information about those persons crossing the state border.
Subsequently the judge used this information on social networks in negative posts about the complainant and his close associates. Holnyk involved her partner in this activity, who, under the guise of a “historian” or “freelance journalist,” also used this information, published insulting and disparaging articles in online publications and posts on social networks about the complainant, his circle, his work as a journalist and entrepreneur, and circumstances related to his private life.
Agreeably, this is very “integritous,” and it also contributes to strengthening the authority of the judiciary and the title of judge, just as we were taught for years by the “Maselko”s, the “Zhernakov”s and the “Shabunin”s!
The time limit for imposing disciplinary action on the judge for Sikalov’s complaint expired in the year 07.11.2026.
Thus, using the best advanced “integrity” techniques, Judge Holnyk did not attend the disciplinary panel hearing herself, but filed a motion to postpone the case, citing whistleblower status and her participation in the High Qualifications Commission of Judges session, which was scheduled for the second half of the same day, that is, after the HCJ session.
However, the First Disciplinary Panel of the HCJ denied that motion and considered the case without her participation, since this was a repeated absence by the judge.
We were struck by the proposal of disciplinary inspector Hura, who suggested issuing Judge Holnyk a reprimand and depriving her of supplemental payments to her judicial salary for one month!?!?!
And this despite the fact that in similar circumstances judges who, with full access, review their colleagues’ decisions in the Unified State Register of Court Decisions (EDRSR), are declared by the HQCJ to have failed the qualification assessment and are dismissed from their positions by the HCJ itself!
However, thanks to the principled position of HCJ member Vitalii Makhinchuk, his alternative proposal was supported and disciplinary action in the form of a submission for dismissal was applied to the judge!
Predictably, such a decision was opposed by only one member of the Disciplinary Panel, a longtime friend of Roman Maselko, who throughout the term catered to his dirty wishes — Tetiana Bondarenko, who thus, among other things, repaid loyalty to herself from grant-funded activists on the issue of appointment to the HCJ membership thanks to the patronage of Vsevolod “zakhody-polozhi” and following his instructions.
https://t.me/PodMantiyey/7485
Telegram publication
