Dmytro Kalancha and the Bukovyna Prosecutor's Office: What Is Known About the Court Case and What Questions Have Arisen for the Prosecutor's Office

Dmytro Kalancha, who presents himself as a journalist and human rights defender, has once again found himself at the center of media attention. This time, the authors of the investigation decided to examine in detail the progress of the criminal proceeding in which he is a defendant, and also drew attention to the actions of the prosecutor's office during the court proceedings.

Dmytro Kalancha recently drew the attention of journalists. After that, the editorial office of “Golos Info” together with the information agency “StopCorruption” launched a journalistic investigation to determine the circumstances of the court case in which Kalancha is a defendant and the reasons for its prolonged consideration.

While processing the materials, journalists drew attention to a number of facts from Kalancha's past and his previous contacts with the law enforcement system.

As Vitaliy Chornyenko stated in a video report, Kalancha has an unexpunged conviction for a deliberate crime related to fraud, for which he previously served a punishment.

In addition, in 2022 year he came under the scrutiny of law enforcement for insulting military personnel. According to the author of the material, after the investigation was completed, the case was sent to court, where Kalancha admitted his guilt. The court imposed a fine of 17 thousand hryvnias.

Currently, journalists’ attention is focused on another criminal proceeding.

According to available information, the pretrial investigation in this case has already been completed, and the indictment against Dmytro Kalancha has been sent to the court. He is accused of fraud on especially large scales.

Author of the plot Vitaliy Chornyenky notes that if Kalancha is found guilty in court, he could face a prison sentence. At the same time, the final decision on guilt can only be made by the court.

Some questions raised by the authors of the journalistic investigation concern the duration of the court proceedings.

According to the investigators, the case has not advanced beyond the preparatory hearing for more than a year. One of the reasons they cite is Kalancha’s change of defense lawyers and his absence from some hearings due to health issues.

In this regard, the journalists ask: if the defendant insists on his innocence, why is the court proceeding, in their version, so delayed?

At the same time, the investigators’ attention was drawn to actions by representatives of the Chernivtsi regional prosecutor’s office who support the prosecution in court.

In particular, the journalists ask why the prosecutor, who represents the state in the prosecution, allegedly did not file a motion to extend the restrictions within the preventive measure established during the pretrial investigation.

The author also notes Kalancha’s own statements about his good relations with representatives of the prosecutor’s office.

Another reason for questions were Kalancha’s latest video blogs in which he spoke positively about the leadership of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine.

The journalist-investigators suggest that such public statements might require separate attention, especially given that Kalancha himself is a defendant in a criminal case.

The journalists also believe that the Office of the Prosecutor General could pay attention to the work of representatives of the Chernivtsi Regional Prosecutor’s Office who are participating in this court process, and check the circumstances that raised questions during the investigative reporting.

The editorial office states that it will continue to provide information coverage of the court sessions in the Dmytro Kalancha case and will report on the further course of the proceedings.

Also read: “Robin Hood” or a controversial activist? Journalist Chornyenky has revealed new facts about Dmytro Kalancha’s activities.