Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
⚖️🧡🧡🧡🧡🧡🧡
The HRC cites publications about Vilchynskyi’s appointment as court chair in 2012 against the wishes of the court collective (the judges had nominated a different candidate). The materials mentioned his ties to the authorities during Yanukovych’s era and assistance from Volodymyr Groysman. The judge explained the appointment as following the procedure in place at the time.
In 2013 the Zhytomyr District Administrative Court found Vilchynskyi’s actions as chair unlawful regarding convening meetings of judges and expressing no confidence in the head of administration (violations of the notification procedure, lack of rules of procedure, etc.). The decision was upheld thereafter.
In 2019 the judge attended the birthday of Yevheniy Ablov (then deputy chair of the Kyiv District Administrative Court) at a Kyiv restaurant together with members of the HCCS. One of those present later presided over the panel that evaluated Vilchynskyi himself. The judge explained this as an old acquaintance from student years and that he “popped in along the way.”
In 2023 Vilchynskyi partially granted a motion for interim relief and prohibited NAZIAO from considering a complaint about possible plagiarism in the doctoral dissertation of the then acting rector of Vinnytsia Medical University. The case later reached the Supreme Court, which closed it. At the same time, the judge’s daughter worked at that university in 2024–2026. The judge later recused himself due to the public resonance.
It was also noted that the judge issued rulings on days when he was attending training at the National School of Judges (in 2013 and 2020), although rules state that judges do not exercise judicial powers while in training.
In the candidate dissertation 2019 (“Attestation Commissions as Subjects of Administrative-Legal Relations”) several passages were found to be borrowed (including from Wikipedia and normative acts without proper citation). The HRC did not make this the main conclusion of dishonesty, but noted that the issue requires discussion.
The judge previously appealed the HRC’s earlier conclusion to court and succeeded in having it annulled by the Zhytomyr District Administrative Court in 2019. The HRC considers such appeals improper because the council is not a body of state power and does not adopt binding acts — final decisions are made by the HCCS.
The conclusion was approved 10 by votes of 18 HRC members. It is information for the High Qualification Commission of Judges within the framework of the qualification evaluation.
💬 ABleaks_bot
💕 Join
Telegram publication
