How judges, deputies, prosecutors caught driving drunk avoided punishment

How judges, deputies, prosecutors caught driving drunk avoided punishment

In Kyiv on the night of 22 July, a woman driving an Audi crashed into a pole and then into a tree, miraculously not hitting any pedestrians. The driver turned out to be Desniansky District Court judge of Kyiv Svitlana Kolehaieva, who was likely intoxicated.

In recent years, on average more than 113 thousand cases of drunk driving are recorded nationwide each year. However, that does not necessarily mean punishment for people caught driving under the influence. Journalists from Slidstvo.Info collected and investigated several of the most egregious cases when influential drunk drivers — deputies, prosecutors, law-enforcement officers — avoided punishment after a court decision.

How to extend youth through the courts

Last year, on the night of 6 June, an administrative protocol was drawn up against Lyubov Marulina, a judge of the Kyiv District Administrative Court, for driving under the influence. According to the patrol officers’ report, the judge was driving a Lexus showing signs of intoxication — slurred speech and the smell of alcohol from her mouth. However, Marulina refused to have her blood alcohol level tested.

Lyubov Marulina / Photo: UNIAN

The protocol was sent for consideration to the Darnytskyi District Court of Kyiv, but it only began to be considered as late as 31 August. The hearings were postponed several times until the last day of the statute of limitations for bringing Marulina to account. The first judge who reviewed the case was disqualified, and according to the case allocation report, the case was reassigned to the court chairperson Tetyana Shchasna — whom a special commission had recommended dismissing for undeclared assets back in 2019.

And it appears that, in order for this case to land specifically with Tetyana Shchasna, the case classification was changed — from an administrative offense it was transformed into a juvenile case. According to the case allocation report, Shchasna was the only one of 18 judges in the Darnytskyi District Court who had the “appropriate” qualification and was not on leave.

Under the deadlines, Tetyana Shchasna only had the option to close the case — three months from the drawing up of the protocol had passed even before she was assigned. The judge did exactly that — but chose a different justification.

The judge received written explanations from Marulina, in which she told her version of events. She claimed that on that evening she was not driving personally, but her friend was, and that the patrol officers had “unjustifiably” drawn up the administrative protocol.

The judge’s friend gave the same testimony, stating that Marulina had not consumed alcohol that evening and felt unwell. She said Marulina took the driver’s seat only after the car was parked. Based on that, Shchasna decided that her colleague from the Kyiv District Administrative Court, Marulina, had not driven the car that night.

Plan one: no one is guilty

Cases like Marulina’s, where a person is exonerated after being recorded driving drunk, are far from isolated. The same happened with Marulina’s colleague from the Sixth District Administrative Court, Kostiantyn Babenko. Judge of the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv Svitlana Smyk decided that Babenko had not been driving, so she closed the case — however, video obtained by the publication proves otherwise.

In November 2019, city patrol officers caught former prosecutor from Ternopil Ihor Mukan, who had previously been dismissed for threatening a colleague. Mukan created a dangerous situation on the road and was stopped. According to the ruling, the man staggered when he exited the car and gave off a “distinct” odor. He spoke to the officers arrogantly, insisting he was completely sober. He also refused to undergo an examination.

At the beginning of 2020, this administrative protocol reached Judge Dmytro Maltsev of the Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv. He noted that from the footage of the police body cameras it was “impossible to establish” whether Mukan had indeed refused to undergo an intoxication test. So the judge closed the case — “due to the absence of elements of an administrative offense.”

Dmytro Maltsev / PHOTO: DEJURE

Sometimes a driver caught drunk is found guilty but not punished. For example, back in 2014 a judge of the Brodivskyi District Court in Lviv region, Anna Bunda, reviewed the protocol on drunk driving by moped rider Pavlo Batiyovskyi. That the man was intoxicated was confirmed by written witness statements and the results of a breathalyzer used by the police. But Bunda issued a rather lenient decision — “punishing” the offender only with a verbal warning. The case was closed due to its insignificance.

A year later, that ruling by Judge Anna Bunda landed her in court herself. The following spring she testified in the Lychakivskyi District Court of Lviv regarding a conflict of interest when making that decision. It turned out that Pavlo Batiyovskyi was Bunda’s half-brother.

Plan two: ran out of time?

At the beginning of February, amendments to laws came into force in Ukraine, including those concerning liability for drunk driving. From now on, the court has one year to consider patrol officers’ protocols and impose a penalty on the offender. Previously judges had to do this within three months, which often did not happen.

For example, former judge of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv Maksym Titov once delayed deadlines in more than two dozen cases involving drivers. According to his finding of dishonesty, by doing so he helped 22 persons avoid punishment. In the end, these facts did not prevent Titov’s career advancement — he now works at the Supreme Court.

Maksym Titov / PHOTO: screenshot from the High Qualification Commission of Judges video

The record holders for delaying deadlines are judges of the Pecherskyi District Court of the capital. Sometimes drunk-driving protocols there are reviewed not days later but months — even years — afterward. For instance, Judge Svitlana Smyk in one case reviewed a traffic violation protocol after 787 days, and in another — after 817 days.

Svitlana Smyk / PHOTO: 'Zakon i biznes'

“Judge Smyk closed 76% of the cases that came before her due to statute of limitations,” says lawyer Roman Maselko. “Over the last two years that’s more than 240 drivers. Similar statistics apply to Judge Bilotserkivets from the same court.”

Oleh Bilotserkivets / PHOTO: UNIAN

A recurring problem

According to DEJURE’s research, as of 2019 nearly half (42%) of all drunk-driving cases are closed without punishment. In some instances this, of course, happens because of errors in recording the violation and inadequate work by the police, analysts say. But judicial “help” is also not uncommon.

As an example, the lawyer cites the story of drunk driving by former deputy Lyudmyla Kostenko. Last year city patrol officers stopped her car for having the headlights off. Officers noticed signs of intoxication in the woman and drew up an administrative protocol. Sitting next to the deputy was the then-deputy mayor of Kyiv Volodymyr Slonchak, who was also intoxicated. He behaved aggressively and even struck a patrol officer.

Two months later the protocol was reviewed in the Solomianskyi District Court of Kyiv by Judge Svitlana Horbatovska. At the hearing the former deputy fully admitted her guilt in violating traffic rules, though she stated she had not consumed alcohol. Kostenko asked for the case to be referred to the workforce of the company Pita-Khlib for consideration. Horbatovska, having examined the materials and a positive character reference for the woman from the firm, agreed to such a “punishment.”

Certain judges constantly help intoxicated drivers, each time using ever more sophisticated methods.

Oleksandr Strukov / PHOTO: 'Poltavshchyna'

Thus, in 2015 Strukov “acquitted” the head of the regional office of the National Bank, Mykhailo Horodnytskyi, on the grounds that the man had been forced to drink cognac instead of taking medicine.

In the Oktyabrskyi District Court of Poltava, Oleksandr Strukov was almost a “monopolist” in drunk-driving cases. In 2017 he issued decisions on more than 300 such protocols. In fact, he reviewed every fourth protocol late, so more than 80 drivers escaped punishment.

Author: Mariya Horban; Slidstvo.Info