Aksyonova Nina Mykolaivna

Judge

1 News changed
or deleted
1 Publications
about the person
50 Media activity score based on the number of recorded publication changes.
Person score

Person information

Judge with lobbying by the High Council of Justice and dubious appointment

Judge of the Solomyanskyi District Court of Kyiv, appointed in 2020. Before that, she unsuccessfully tried for more than 12 years to join the judiciary: in 2013, the High Qualification Commission of Judges (HQCJ) included her in the reserve with a relatively low score of 63.5, excluded her in 2016, and re-included her in 2019. The appointment was made with the support of Viktor Shapran, a member of the High Council of Justice (HCJ) — a person known for close ties to former OASK Chairman Pavlo Vovk and accusations of protecting judges. Prior to obtaining the position, Aksyonova worked as an assistant to Judge Yulia Hnatushenko of the Rivne District Court, from which she left amid scandal. Her career path in the judiciary is associated with connections within the system rather than legal qualifications: colleagues describe her as a low-motivated judge with minimal workload (up to 6 cases per day compared to 15–20 for colleagues).

Accusations of bribes in the court corridor and customs schemes

In 2022–2023, several media outlets and YouTube channels published materials stating that Aksyonova systematically ruled in favor of individuals smuggling luxury items. Documented decisions include: return of a Louis Vuitton bag valued at UAH 90,000, exemption from fines for undeclared Louis Vuitton and Bottega Veneta items, return of Cartier (~$10,000) and Hermes (~€5,000) jewelry, and return of €4,600 to an unemployed citizen. The publication "Anti-Corruption Truth" directly accused the judge of accepting bribes in the court corridor. In October 2023, a picket with signs "No to corruption" took place near the court building, and Judge Aksyonova herself appealed to the HCJ and the Prosecutor General concerning "interference with justice" due to pressure from the publications. As of the time of publication, law enforcement agencies had not responded to the appeals.