Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
Independent child-rearing or evading conscription? In Skvyra Court, dozens of suits by men of draft age were granted — the JRB opened disciplinary proceedings against one of the judges.
Skvyra is a small town of district significance, located in the Bila Tserkva district of Kyiv region. Here operates Skvyra District Court — according to OpenDataBot, this legal entity is currently in the process of liquidation. But in terms of the number of rulings that a father 'is raising a child independently,' this court, as analysis of the court register and materials from the High Council of Justice indicate, is one of the leaders among Kyiv region district courts. It should be noted that in the conditions of general mobilization such decisions have practical weight: they can become grounds for a deferral.
Is there really an abnormally high number of such decisions in the Skvyra District Court? And what does Judge Oleksandr Kovalenko, who, according to OpenDataBot, heads the court, have to do with it? StopKor analyzed court registry data and open sources.
According to the court rulings registry, the editorial team found in most Kyiv region district courts only a handful of cases of a similar nature:
• Bila Tserkva city and district — two cases (Nos. 357/10920/24, Nos. 357/17547/25).
• Brovary — also two (Nos. 361/11889/24 and Nos. 361/5128/24), with the first one explicitly stating the purpose: a deferral.
• Kyiv-Sviatoshyn — two cases (Nos. 369/16184/25, Nos. 369/23167/25)•
Makaryiv — one case (Nos. 370/2162/25).
• In Rokytne district (case No. 375/2255/25) a serviceman referenced discharge from service and crossing the border.
• Barishivskyi court — one case (Nos. 355/2373/24). The court granted the petition.
• Fastiv court in case No. 381/95/25 refused the applicant, explicitly noting the risk of artificially creating grounds for deferral from mobilization; this case later reached the Supreme Court.
But in Skvyra district the situation is radically different: we found dozens of cases of self-raised children by a father.
Over a hundred court decisions: what is the HPJ studying?
This year the High Council of Justice opened a disciplinary case against Skvyra District Court judge Oleksandr Kovalenko. In the HPJ act from 02.09.2026 the number of cases he presided over concerning establishing the fact of self-raised children exceeded a hundred. Another 20 cases listed in the act are claims (loss of parental rights, child's residence, alimony). As the HPJ records, all these claims were granted. In other words, essentially a one-hundred-percent success rate.
The basis for opening the disciplinary proceedings was a complaint by Anna Borisenko, a lawyer from the All-Ukrainian Association 'AutoMaidan'. Our colleagues from Anti-Corruption reported on this story. According to AntiKor, Borisenko's complaint covered more than 100 cases. The complainant stated that the judge allegedly did not involve guardianship authorities, did not ascertain the children's opinions, handled cases too quickly, and some of the decisions could be connected with deferral.
Oleksandr Kovalenko denies these statements; at present this is only about the existence of a complaint and disciplinary proceedings, not a finding of guilt.
30 September The Second Disciplinary Chamber halted consideration of Kovalenko's case until additional materials are obtained.
Media 'Law and Business' drew attention: an activist (quote) 'only suspicious cases over three years accumulated more than a hundred. Yet such volume did not prevent the chamber from scheduling a hearing within less than a month after the proceedings began'.
What is known about Judge Kovalenko?
According to OpenDataBot, Oleksandr Kovalenko has led Skvyra Court since February 2024 of the year. The judge's productivity is striking: the CourtHelp service shows more than 20 thousand rulings and orders attributed to him since 2015, of which 3256 — only for 2024 year. About 80% of Kovalenko's practice is civil cases.
In 2024-th year, as AntiKor reported, the judge awarded $812,86 million from Russia's Sberbank in a case concerning assets in Sochi, and later replaced the creditor with a Delaware-based (USA) company.
In the judge's annual declaration for 2025 year — 1,11 million hryvnias in judicial remuneration, an apartment of 46,2 m² owned, another one in use, a wife’s land plot of 1,2 ha, and 8,7 thousand dollars in cash.
In July 2025-th year he acquired a new Toyota Corolla for 1,6 million hryvnias, and the declaration also lists a loan of 914 thousand hryvnias. The judge's wife in the same year earned 281,8 thousand hryvnias from selling movable property. Also in 2023, the publication 'My Kyiv region' published an article citing an anonymous post claiming the judge and a secretary at one hearing could not confirm their powers. There are no official confirmations of this story.
What is the Supreme Court's position on self-raised children cases?
As of October 2024 year, the Supreme Court's Grand Chamber concluded that the fact of sole child-rearing is not established in a separate proceeding — only as a circumstance in a dispute between parents.
The Cassation Civil Court added that a child living with a father is not self-rearing and does not automatically grant deferral, and the TCC can appeal such decisions.
Thus, when the Skvyra decisions were made, was the Supreme Court's position taken into account? The HPJ should provide the answer.
Note that similar stories StopKor has already covered in other regions: in Chernivtsi, law enforcement checked nearly 1800 district court guardianship rulings, and in Sumy region two judges from Konotop Court faced suspicion: according to investigators, they issued fictitious divorce and 'self-rearing' rulings that men later used for illegal mobilization exemptions.
A question without an answer
Igor Bondarchuk, head of the All-Ukrainian NGO 'Stop Corruption,' commenting on the situation, asks awkward questions to the judicial system:
'In Kyiv region, the HPJ is already analyzing dozens of Skvyra Court rulings on self-rearing of children. Some of these rulings may affect men's mobilization status. There is a principal case in Bila Tserkva Court that reached the Supreme Court. Why does judicial practice vary so much across district courts, and what safeguards should prevent turning family justice into a device for obtaining deferrals?'.
He also cites a comparative analysis: in most courts in the region, cases of self-rearing are heard only in a claims procedure. The defendant should be the other parent, and the guardianship service must be involved as a third party. If the plaintiff is a conscript, the Territorial Center for Recruitment and Social Support (TCC) or a military unit can be involved. Without a guardianship authority's conclusion and a housing condition report, the case is not heard. Children older than 10 years are always interviewed, and younger ones are also heard. This approach is also required by the Supreme Court: in June 2026 year it confirmed that the TCC has the right to challenge such decisions, as they can become grounds for deferral.
'The Supreme Court has long given a clear answer. If the mother lives separately or even abroad, it does not mean the father is raising the child alone. If she calls the child and asks about their life, she is already participating in upbringing. A parental agreement or notarial contract is also not sufficient: you cannot waive familial duties on paper,' explains Igor Bondarchuk.
At the same time, the Supreme Court does not close the path for those who truly remained with the child. For example, the Obolon Court in Kyiv this year established such a fact for a father whose child’s mother disappeared under special circumstances. The court also emphasized that it does not decide on deferral: that is the competence of authorized bodies.
'Such decisions are indeed justified in certain cases when there is a real tragedy or need to protect the child's interests. But every 'conveyor belt' decision without guardianship, without interviewing the child, and without a state representative discredits those parents who truly need protection. And the court head, although he cannot instruct judges how to decide cases, should see his court's statistics and know the Supreme Court's mandatory positions,' stresses the head of Stop Corruption NGO.
StopKor team has sent corresponding requests to Skvyra District Court, the HPJ, and the Higher Qualification Commission of Judges. The editorial team is also ready to provide a platform for Judge Oleksandr Kovalenko to express his position.
It should be noted that before the HPJ decision, the judge is considered to have not committed a disciplinary offense.
Document: PDF proof of the original version of the news item "Сквирський феномен: чому в одному з районів Київщини чоловіки частіше стають "батьками-одинаками" і до чого тут суддя Коваленко?". It records the publication content at the moment of the first scan, the preservation date and the source: StopKor.
