Judicial sabotage? In the medical malpractice case against Odrex doctors, more than 80% of hearings were disrupted in October

The Kyiv District Court of Odesa in October held only three of 16 planned sessions in the high-profile case of medical negligence by Odrex doctors. The remaining 13 hearings were postponed at the defense side's request.

The case concerning the death of Adnan Kivan: what the Odrex doctors are accused of. This concerns criminal proceedings against surgeon Vitaliy Rusekov and oncologist Marina Byelocherskaya, who are charged with improper performance of professional duties under part 1 of article 140 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The case concerns the circumstances of treatment of Odessian businessman, founder of KADORR Group Adnan Kivan, who died in October 2024 year at the Odrex clinic. According to the investigation, after the operation, doctors may have failed to prescribe the necessary antibiotic therapy to the patient and may have inadequately responded to postoperative complications. Also read: In the case of the death of developer Adnan Kivan, two doctors were charged. According to the conclusions of the forensic medical examination, this could have led to the development of sepsis and the death of the businessman. Both doctors do not admit their guilt. The court must give the final assessment of their actions. However, will the court manage to render a verdict before the statute of limitations expires is an increasingly pressing question. 20 transferred hearings over 2 months. In October alone, out of 16 planned hearings, the Kyiv District Court of Odesa managed to hold three: 1, 8 and 29 of October. The rest 13 hearings were postponed. Thus, more than 80% of the scheduled monthly hearings did not take place. The tight hearing schedule has a fully justified explanation – the court must ensure the case is considered in reasonable time. For already in the autumn of 2027 year it will be three years since Adnan Kivan’s death, and thus the question of the statute of limitations for bringing the doctors to criminal liability may arise. At the same time, the case may not conclude with a first-instance court decision, because any party has the right to appeal the verdict. Since the statute of limitations is calculated until the judgment becomes legally binding, further delays create the risk that the judicial process will not end with a final decision on the merits of the accusation. Such “intensity” of judicial consideration apparently does not satisfy one of the accused – surgeon Vitaliy Rusekov. He has repeatedly criticized the hearing schedule on his social networks, calling it excessive, and stated that his criminal case should be heard no more often than once a month. Given this, a question arises about the motives of the accused, who insists on his innocence but seeks to slow down the judicial process. Also read: In the case of Adnan Kivan’s death: the court was again postponed due to the absence of the doctors’ lawyer. Signs of possible delay in the case were already noticeable in September. Then, out of 13 planned hearings, only six took place, while seven were postponed. In October, the situation worsened. Thus, in two months out of 29 planned hearings, only nine took place, and 20 were postponed. The statistics reveal a worrying trend – each month the defense side files more and more petitions to adjourn. At such a pace, the prospect of finishing the criminal proceedings before the statute of limitations expires becomes increasingly uncertain. The judge warned the attorneys, but the hearings were again postponed. The presiding judge in the case, Viktor Chaplytsky, repeatedly drew attention to the behavior of the defense lawyers for the accused doctors. As reporters noted, in September he found the reasons for the absence of Vitaliy Rusekov’s defenders in court sessions to be unworthy and sent a corresponding order to the Qualification-Disciplinary Commission of the Bar. And in 29 October, the judge warned the lawyers that he would respond to further petitions to adjourn hearings. Yet, the very next day, 30 October, Rusekov’s defenders filed another motion to postpone the hearing. This time one of Vitaliy Rusekov’s defenders cited being busy in another judicial proceeding, and the other cited family circumstances. Whether this situation will have procedural or disciplinary consequences for the lawyers is not yet known. The next hearing is scheduled for 5 November.

Earlier, RBC-Ukraine published an explanation from Andriy Misiacha, the representative of the Higher Qualification-Disciplinary Commission of the Bar, regarding the accountability of defenders for interrupting court sessions. According to him, systematic no-shows by lawyers without valid reasons may become a basis for disciplinary liability. At the same time, being occupied in another court case is not an unconditional excuse for the absence of a defender.