Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
While rescuers in Solomianskyi and Darnytskyi districts of Kyiv were pulling residents’ bodies out from under the rubble, a few kilometers away in an upscale restaurant on Pavla Skoropadskoho Street, expensive champagne was flowing. Members of the High Council of Justice — the body that daily punishes judges for “unethical behavior outside of service” — gathered during working hours to celebrate the resignation of their colleague Dmytro Lukyanov.
This is reported by Sudovo-Yurydychna Hazeta.
The morning of 20 August began for every Kyiv resident with horror. A Russian mass attack on the capital lasted nearly nine hours. When the first rays of sun pierced the thick smoke over destroyed buildings in Solomianskyi, Sviatoshynskyi, and Darnytskyi districts, rescuers were still clearing debris and searching for people. According to official KMVA data, the death toll rose to 15 people, including children. The next day, 21 August, Kyiv was declared a day of mourning.
But at the same time, while search-and-rescue operations and emergency work were underway at more than 10 locations, in the heart of the capital — in the upscale Italian restaurant “Mario Ristorante Italiano” — the atmosphere was completely different. There, amid wailing sirens and the echoes of air-raid alarms that continued to tear through the airspace, a banquet began. The occasion was weighty: a former member of the High Council of Justice organized a large-scale celebration of his resignation. Current colleagues eagerly joined, arriving in their cars in the middle of the workday.
This event is not simply a display of moral blindness. It is a verdict on a system of double standards that the main body of judicial governance has built for years. The body that punishes ordinary judges for the smallest ethical lapses has demonstrated a complete loss of its own moral compass.
Who arrived for the resignation celebration?
The banquet was organized to mark the end of Dmytro Lukyanov’s powers; he had been elected a member of the High Council of Justice in 2022 by the quota of the congress of representatives of law higher-education institutions and research institutions. His four-year term officially expired on the eve of 19 August 2026.
Lukyanov decided to celebrate his resignation immediately, on 20 August. Despite the fact that it was Thursday — an official working day when the HCJ should have been considering disciplinary complaints and resolving the fate of thousands of blocked judicial processes — the HCJ members all moved to the restaurant together.
Among the guests who arrived in luxury cars, key figures of the judiciary were recorded:
Hryhorii Usyk — chair of the High Council of Justice and a person who, given his position, should be one of the main examples of professional ethics and integrity for the entire judicial system. He was elected to the HCJ by the XX Congress of Judges of Ukraine on 16 August 2022. He arrived at the event in an official vehicle. The relevant vehicle was captured in photo and video materials available to the editorial office.
Today Usyk heads the body that is, among other things, responsible for judicial discipline and professional ethics. Society reasonably expects from the HCJ chair not only enforcement of ethical standards for other judges, but also personal adherence to those standards.
Mykola Moroz — HCJ member elected on 15 August 2022 by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine under the parliamentary quota. His powers were set to end in August 2026.
Tetiana Spiridonova — judge of the Khmelnytskyi Court of Appeal, elected a member of the HCJ on 11 March 2026 by the XX regular Congress of Judges of Ukraine. Only a few months ago she took the oath, pledging to conscientiously, honestly, and impartially perform her duties and adhere to professional ethics.
Oksana Kvasha — HCJ member elected in November 2023 by the congress of representatives of law higher-education institutions and research institutions. Vitalii Makhinchuk — HCJ member appointed in October 2025 by the President of Ukraine.
Also at the event were Yuliia Bokova, Tetiana Bondarenko, Olha Popikova, and Olena Kovbiich — HCJ members elected by the respective congresses in 2023 and 2026.
Roman Maselko was also recorded at the event — literally days after his powers in the HCJ ended. So if for current Council members this meeting was on a workday, for Maselko it was a meeting with former colleagues. His presence adds another touch to the event: formally he had already left the Council, but apparently had not left its inner circle of social contacts.
The presence of all the named persons is confirmed by photo and video documentation. All materials were recorded and provided to the editorial office by colleagues and concerned citizens.
Menu amid wailing sirens
While Kyiv residents were helping evacuate neighbors from partially destroyed entrances in Solomianska, at Mario tables for guests had already been set.
The venue’s menu included oysters costing 200 – 230 UAH each, antipasti with truffle honey — 770 UAH, veal carpaccio — up to 665 UAH, and Scottish salmon tartare — up to 665 UAH. Argentina ribeye — up to 2190 UAH per portion, and a fruit platter — almost 2 thousand.
Most striking is the wine list: Cristal Louis Roederer — 34 800 UAH per bottle, and Veuve Clicquot — 9000 UAH.
Whether those exact items were ordered is a separate question that requires confirmation. These are only menu prices, not confirmation of actual orders.
But the assortment and prices already give an idea of the level of the establishment and the format of the event. This list of dishes and alcohol during shelling of the capital looks not simply like a resignation celebration, but like a moral separation from the reality in which the country lives.
Where did HCJ members lose ethics and integrity?
The High Council of Justice, according to the law, is an independent constitutional body designed to form an honest and highly professional corps of judges and to ensure adherence to professional ethics. However, the behavior of the Council’s own members directly contradicts the standards they apply to others.
Council members are obliged to adhere to the ethical standards established for judges both in their official activities and outside them.
Let us turn to the HCJ’s own official decisions, where they assessed “unethical behavior” of judges:
On duties outside of service (Decision in the case of Judge Shymchyk R.V.):
In its decision the HCJ emphasized: “behavior — both during the administration of justice and outside of service — must correspond to standards that do not give rise to reasonable doubts about the honesty, independence, and impartiality of the judiciary.” It was also noted that “unethical behavior toward participants in proceedings, etc., leads to a reduction in authority and makes such behavior incomprehensible to society.” Celebrating in a restaurant during the death of fellow citizens is precisely the behavior that is absolutely “incomprehensible to society.”
On observance of working hours (Decision in the case of Judge Kikhtenko S.O.)
The Third Disciplinary Chamber of the HCJ (in the composition of which, incidentally, Dmytro Lukyanov himself previously signed) held a judge accountable for absence from the workplace, stating: “systematic and unjustified absence from the workplace during working hours... has signs of intentional evasion of the administration of justice and is grounds for disciplinary sanction.” The HCJ stressed that absence without valid reasons is “one of the most serious disciplinary offenses.” The question arises whether the HCJ members’ being at the restaurant during working hours was related to the performance of official duties and whether it was properly coordinated.
On public trust (Decision in the case of Judge Usatov D.D.)
The HCJ has repeatedly stated that a judge, and therefore an HCJ member, is obliged to “demonstrate and maintain high standards of behavior in any activity in order to strengthen public trust in the court” and to be “a model of decency outside the bounds of professional activity.”
How does celebrating on the day of tragedy strengthen public trust?
These decisions expose both legal and moral contradictions: judges are held accountable for ethical breaches, while members of the HCJ, who are supposed to be models of integrity, show contempt for basic standards of behavior.
Whose money paid for the banquet?
According to information the editorial office received, the bill for the event may have been paid by Dmytro Lukyanov. If this information is confirmed, the question becomes not only one of ethics but also a concrete question concerning compliance with anti-corruption legislation.
For current HCJ members, having their treats paid for by another person could potentially be considered receiving a gift. Article 23 of the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption” establishes restrictions on officials’ receipt of gifts. Of course, the mere fact that someone else paid the restaurant bill does not automatically mean a corrupt offense — for a legal assessment specific circumstances, the cost of the treat, and the status of the person who paid matter.
So here is a simple question that deserves a simple answer: who exactly paid the bill, for what amount, and for whom?
If the treat was indeed paid by a former HCJ member for his current colleagues, it is at least a reason to check whether such a situation complies with the law’s restrictions on gifts.
Then the question becomes not only what was on the table, but who paid for that table and which HCJ member will be the first to dare to include that upscale lunch in their declaration of integrity?
European standards: how do Western countries react to similar scandals?
In countries with developed democracies, even much smaller ethical lapses lead to the immediate end of a political career and public condemnation. European officials know well that reputation is the main capital.
In the United Kingdom in 1998, two close friends of Prime Minister Tony Blair — Trade and Industry Secretary Peter Mandelson and millionaire Jeffrey Robinson — were forced to resign immediately. That was because Mandelson took a private loan from Robinson in the amount of 627 000 dollars to buy a house at a low interest rate. Although a legal violation was not proven, Blair immediately signed their resignations so as not to allow even a shadow of doubt about his government’s integrity.
In Sweden Deputy Prime Minister Mona Sahlin found herself at the center of the so‑called “Toblerone scandal.” It turned out she had used a government credit card for personal purchases, including a Toblerone chocolate bar. Although the funds were repaid, Sahlin withdrew her candidacy for prime minister and resigned. Later, in 2016, she left public life entirely after a scandal involving a false certificate for a security guard.
In France in 2019 the Minister of Ecology and the second‑ranking person in François de Rugy’s government resigned after an investigation by Mediapart. Journalists published photos of his lavish meals with lobsters and expensive wine paid for from the state budget under the pretext of “working meetings.” De Rugy tried to defend himself, but public condemnation forced him to leave the government.
The fish rots from the head
Today Ukraine’s judicial system is operating on the edge of physical survival. More than 2100 judicial vacancies have been recorded in the country’s courts, meaning millions of Ukrainians wait years for simple lawful decisions because there is physically no one to hear the cases. Sitting judges are working at 200–300% of their normal workload.
And at the same time the High Council of Justice, which is supposed to rescue the system, staff it with honest cadres, and act as a moral compass, holds parties during working hours in restaurants.
The conduct of HCJ members is no longer merely a matter of professional ethics. Against the backdrop of the mass attack on Kyiv and the death of people, such demonstrative behavior looks like contempt for society, military personnel, and Kyiv residents who that day were losing loved ones and clearing rubble.
How will these people look their fellow judges in the eye, whom they punish for unethical behavior? How do they plan to demand integrity from candidates if they themselves cannot resist free Cristal during working hours?
This event proves that judicial reform will not yield results until a real cleansing of the cleansing body itself is carried out. After all, the folk proverb does not lie: fish always rots from the head. And perhaps, before demanding “ethics” from ordinary regional judges, Ukraine should cleanse the High Council of Justice of such representatives.
Editorial note: The material was prepared based on materials and photos provided by colleagues and concerned citizens, HCJ decisions on judges’ disciplinary liability (¹ 1226/3dp/15-24 dated 24.04.2024, ¹ 486/0/15-25 dated 11.03.2025, ¹ 1623/1dp/15-21 dated 21.07.2021), the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption,” the NACP report on gift limits, KMVA official data on the consequences of the shelling of Kyiv 20.08.2026, and European practice regarding political responsibility.
Author: Volodymyr Pravo
Document: PDF proof of the original version of the news item "15 жертв у Києві — а для ВРП відкорковували шампанське: суддя Усик разом із колегами відзначали звільнення Лук’янова просто посеред робочого дня". It records the publication content at the moment of the first scan, the preservation date and the source: Rozsliduvach.
