Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
While rescuers in Solom'ianskyi and Darnytskyi districts of Kyiv were pulling bodies from the rubble of Kyiv residents, 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 disciplines judges daily for “unethical conduct off duty” — gathered during working hours to celebrate the retirement of their colleague Dmytro Lukyanov.
This is reported by the Justice and Law Gazette.
The morning of 20 August began for every Kyiv resident with horror. Russia’s massive attack on the capital lasted almost nine hours. When the first rays of sun pierced through the thick smoke over ruined buildings in Solom'ianskyi, Sviatoshynskyi, and Darnytskyi districts, rescuers continued clearing debris and searching for people. According to official Kyiv City State Administration data, the number of dead rose to 15 people, including children. The next day, 21 August, Kyiv was declared a day of mourning.
But at the same time, while rescue operations and emergency work continued at more than 10 locations, in the heart of the capital — in the upscale Italian restaurant “Mario Ristorante Italiano” — a completely different atmosphere prevailed. There, under the blare of sirens and the echo of alarms that kept tearing through the air, a banquet began. The occasion was serious: a former member of the High Council of Justice organized a large celebration of his retirement. He was joined by current colleagues who arrived in their cars in the midst of the workday.
This event is not merely a sign of moral blindness. It is a verdict against a system of double standards that the main judicial governance body had been building for years. The body that punishes ordinary judges for the slightest ethical lapses demonstrated a complete loss of its own moral compass.
Who attended the retirement celebration?
The banquet was organized to mark the completion of Dmytro Lukyanov’s tenure as a member of the High Council of Justice. He was elected to the High Council of Justice in 2022 year by the quota of the Congress of representatives of law schools and scientific institutions. His four-year term officially expired on the eve of 19 August 2026 year.
Lukyanov decided to celebrate the retirement immediately, 20 August. Although it was Thursday — an official working day when the High Council of Justice should be considering disciplinary complaints and deciding the fate of thousands of blocked court cases — the members of the HCJ moved to the restaurant in unison.
Among the guests arriving in upscale cars, the key figures of the judiciary were recorded:
Grigoriy Usyk — head of the High Council of Justice and a person who, given his position, should be one of the main exemplars of professional ethics and integrity for the entire judiciary. He was elected to the High Council of Justice by the XX Congress of Judges of Ukraine on 16 August 2022 year. He arrived at the event in a official service car. The corresponding vehicle is captured in photos and videos available to the editors.
Today it is Usyk who leads the body responsible, among other things, for questions of judicial discipline and professional ethics. From the head of the High Council of Justice the public naturally expects not only oversight of other judges’ adherence to ethical standards but also personal adherence to these standards.
Mykola Moroz — member of the High Council of Justice, elected in 15 August 2022 year by the parliamentary quota. His mandate was to end in August 2026 year.
Tetiana Spiridonova — judge of the Khmelnytskyi Court of Appeal, elected as a member of the High Council of Justice in 11 March 2026 year by the XX Congress of Judges of Ukraine. Only a few months ago she took an oath, promising to conscientiously, honestly, and impartially perform her duties and to adhere to professional ethics.
Oksana Kvasha — member of the High Council of Justice, elected in November 2023 year by the Congress of representatives of law schools and scientific institutions. Vitaliy Makhinchuk — member of the High Council of Justice, appointed in October 2025 year by the President of Ukraine.
Also present were Yuliya Bokova, Tetiana Bondarenko, Olha Popikova, and Olena Kovbii — members of the High Council of Justice elected by respective congresses in 2023 and 2026 years.
Roman Maselko was also recorded at the event — just a few days after completing his tenure on the High Council of Justice. So for current members this was a workday gathering, but for Maselko it was a reunion with former colleagues. His presence adds another twist: formally he has already left the Council, but apparently he has not severed ties within its circle.
The presence of all named individuals is confirmed by photo and video documentation. All materials are recorded and provided to the editors by colleagues and concerned citizens.
Menu under the blare of sirens
While Kyiv residents were helping to evacuate neighbors from semi-destroyed entrances in Solom’ianskyi, the tables for guests at Mario were already laid.
The restaurant menu included oysters priced at 200 – 230 UAH apiece, antipasti with truffle honey — 770 UAH, beef carpaccio — up to 665 UAH, and tartare of Scottish salmon — up to 665 UAH. Argentinian ribeye — up to 2190 UAH per portion, and a fruit plate — almost 2 thousand.
The wine list is especially striking: Cristal Louis Roederer — 34 800 UAH per bottle, and Veuve Clicquot — 9000 UAH.
Whether these exact items were ordered is another question that requires verification. These are only menu prices, not confirmation of an actual order.
But the assortment and prices already give a sense of the establishment’s level and the event’s format. This list of dishes and alcohol during the shelling of the capital looks not merely like a retirement party, but a moral renunciation of the reality in which the country lives.
Where did the High Council of Justice lose ethics and integrity?
According to the law, the High Council of Justice is an independent constitutional body tasked with forming a corps of judges that is noble and highly professional, and with ensuring adherence to professional ethics. Yet the behavior of the Council’s own members directly contradicts the standards they apply to others.
Members of the Council, in their activities and outside of them, are obligated to adhere to the ethical standards established for judges.
Let us refer to the High Council of Justice’s own official decisions, where they assessed “unethical conduct” of judges:
Obligations off duty (Decision in the case of judge Shymchyk R.V.):
In its decision, the HCJ emphasized: “conduct — both while administering justice and off duty — must meet standards that do not give rise to reasonable doubts about the integrity, independence, and impartiality of the judiciary.” It was also noted that “unethical conduct with participants in the process, etc., leads to a decrease in authority and makes such conduct incomprehensible to society.” A celebration in a restaurant during citizens’ deaths is exactly the conduct that is completely “incomprehensible to society.”
On adherence to working hours (Decision in the case of judge Kihhtenko S.O.)
The Third Disciplinary Chamber of the HCJ (which, incidentally, Lukyanov himself had previously signed) held a judge liable for absence from the workplace, noting: “systematic and unwarranted absence from the workplace during working hours… constitutes signs of intentional evading the administration of justice and is grounds for disciplinary punishment.” The HCJ stressed that absence without good reason is “one of the most serious disciplinary offenses.” The question arises whether the presence of HCJ members at a restaurant during working hours was connected with performing 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 thus a member of the HCJ, must “demonstrate and maintain high standards of conduct in any activity to strengthen public trust in the court” and be “a model of decency beyond professional activity.”
How does a celebration on a tragedy day strengthen public trust?
These decisions reveal both legal and moral contradictions: judges are held accountable for ethical violations, while the HCJ members, supposed to be role models of integrity, demonstrate a disregard for basic standards of conduct.
Whose expense was the banquet?
According to information obtained by the editors, the bill for the event could have been paid by Dmytro Lukyanov. If confirmed, this raises not only questions of ethics but also a concrete issue of compliance with anti-corruption law.
For current HCJ members, having their meal paid by another person could potentially be considered receiving a gift. Article 23 of the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption” sets limits on receiving gifts by officials. Of course, the mere fact of another person paying the restaurant bill does not automatically constitute a corruption offense — a legal assessment requires specific circumstances, the cost of the treat, and the status of the paying person.
So here is a simple question to get a simple answer: who exactly paid the bill, for how much, and for whom?
If the treat really was paid by a former HCJ member for his current colleagues, this is at least a reason to check whether such a situation complies with the gift restrictions established by law.
And then the question is not only what was on the table, but also who paid for that table and which HCJ members will first include this elite lunch in their integrity declarations?
European standards: how Western countries respond to such scandals?
In countries with established democracy, even far smaller ethical lapses lead to an immediate end to political careers and public censure. European officials know well that reputation is the main capital.
In the United Kingdom, in 1998 year, two close friends of Prime Minister Tony Blair — Minister of Trade and Industry Peter Mandelson and billionaire Geoff Robinson — were forced to resign immediately. Because Mandelson took a private loan from Robinson amounting to 627 000 dollars to buy a house at a low interest rate. Although the fact of breaking the law was not proven, Blair immediately signed the resignations to avoid even a shadow of doubt about the integrity of his government.
In Sweden, Deputy Prime Minister Mona Sahlin found herself at the center of the so-called “Toblerone scandal.” It turned out she used a government credit card for personal purchases, including a Toblerone chocolate bar. Although the funds were returned, Sahlin withdrew her candidacy for prime minister and resigned. Later, in 2016 year, she left public life after a scandal with a forged note for a security guard.
In France in 2019 year the Minister of the Environment and the second person in the government, François de Rugy, resigned after Mediapart’s investigation. Journalists published photos of his lavish lunches with lobsters and expensive wine paid for from the state budget under the banner “working meetings.” De Rugy tried to defend himself, but public condemnation forced him to leave the government.
A fish rots from the head down
Today Ukraine’s judiciary system is operating on the brink of physical survival. There are more than 2100 vacant judgeships in the courts, leaving millions of Ukrainians waiting for simple and lawful rulings because there is nobody to hear the cases. Current judges are working with workloads of 200–300% of the norm.
And at the same time, the High Council of Justice, which should save the system, fill it with virtuous personnel, and serve as a moral compass, arranges parties during working hours in restaurants.
The behavior of HCJ members is no longer just an issue of professional ethics. In the face of a massive attack on Kyiv and the deaths of people, such demonstrative behavior looks like a contempt for society, the military, and Kyiv residents who were losing loved ones and clearing debris that day.
How will these people look their fellow judges in the eye, whom they discipline 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 reform of the judiciary will not yield results until there is real cleansing of the very cleansing body. After all, the folk saying is true: the fish rots from the head. And perhaps, before demanding “ethics” from ordinary judges in the regions, Ukraine should cleanse the High Council of Justice itself of such representatives.
Editorial note: This material was prepared based on materials and photos provided by colleagues and concerned citizens, HCJ decisions on disciplinary liability of judges (¹ 1226/3dp/15-24 from 24.04.2024, ¹ 486/0/15-25 from 11.03.2025, ¹ 1623/1dp/15-21 from 21.07.2021), the Law of Ukraine “On Prevention of Corruption,” the NABU/NAZK report on gift limits, official data of the KMVA on Kyiv bombing consequences 20.08.2026, and European practice of political accountability.
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.
