Andrii Dovbenko was arrested in absentia
Andrii Dovbenko has an ambiguous reputation in the legal market. In particular, by working for Kurchenko and influencing executive proceedings. We, investigative journalists, and caring activists wrote about him. But it is one thing to discuss and write texts behind the scenes, another thing is to prove guilt. NABU and SAPO are doing it no well, mildly speaking.
- On Wednesday morning, investigative bloggers from NABU published a video in which quite an awful voice reads correspondence between the alleged organizer of a criminal group and the alleged head of ARMA. The correspondence deals with the auction sale of land, carbamide), and sand. Law enforcement bloggers say that these two, as well as nine others, caused damage to the state worth 500 million hryvnias.
- At the same time, the SAPO reported on FB that the court chose a preventive measure in the form of arrest for a certain head of a criminal group, which caused damage to the state school for 485 million hryvnias. The arrest was made in absentia because the anti-corruption vertical has not yet been able to establish the exact location of the person, even though Andrii was put on the international wanted list as early as January 3. It is not clear where the 15 million difference between the amount of damage from NABU and the amount from SAPO went.
- But two hours before the publications of these respectable bloggers, Andrii Dovbenko announced on Facebook that the State Security Service had arrested him in absentia. Although he says that he is not hiding, on the contrary, he informed both NABU and SAPO about where exactly he lives in London and which line of the subway is better to get there.
What the attorneys say
We asked Andrii for a comment, and in response, he offered to read the position of his lawyer Denys Bugay. Denys published a defensive speech on FB called “YouTube Justice” and emphasized many important things, including the fact that:
This correspondence has nothing to do with the Client. It was obviously involved with different (at least four different) people. Due to the impossibility of identifying such persons, the investigation baselessly indicates that it was with Andrii Dovbenko. Moreover, the correspondence published by the investigation contains many contradictions that directly contradict other materials of the investigation.
Usually, in such cases, we collect the opinions of other lawyers from the market. This is not always easy, because many people have a conflict of interest.
Here is what attorney and Arzinger partner Katya Hupalo says:
Here, with Andrii, I will not turn out to be a completely outside observer, because we studied together in the university. At the same time, there is one aspect in this case that I cannot comment on. Namely, the re-handing of suspicion.
I once had a case where there was a special subject — an attorey at law. But the suspicion was handed over by an ordinary investigator. When it was discovered, the case was closed. Because they understood that there is no provision for re-handing of the suspicion. I periodically followed this case, made inquiries about its status. And that’s why I know that even the General Inspectorate of the General Prosecutor’s Office looked at it and did not find a way to re-submit the suspicion under such conditions.
Therefore, I was very surprised that SAP was not “bothered” by this situation in any way and they took such a creative path, which they did not dare to do in the “normal” prosecutor’s office.
After all, there is also a violation of the attorney’s guarantees. Plus, there is judicial practice, which says that when suspicion is served with a violation, everything that follows becomes essentially worthless…
Because if the High-Anticorruption Court misses it, it’s like opening Pandora’s box: something didn’t work out for us the first time and we missed the deadline, but let’s suspect it again and do it all over again… somehow, according to their logic, it “works out”.
By the way, we would like to disagree with Katya. There can be no question of repeated prosecution for the same offense. After all, there was no verdict for this offense. Suspicion is just a warning to a person that the state is going to prove their guilt in court (on a specific set of charges) in order to try to bring them to justice.
Instead, there is renew suspicion here, because at first, it was substandard. Possible consequences? Arbitrary.
Anti-corruptionists around the world will say: this is not the same as in the case of an exclusive liability — it is something different. This time, an unauthorized subject suddenly became self-empowered and did a good deed to benefit society. And this is another proof that the right people can bear fruit.
Defenders will say: wait a minute, have you read Article 19 of the Constitution? Have you read the Criminal Procedure Code?
But really everything depends on what the Supreme Court will say. Whether it will be able to distinguish the formalism of the first and the second from the excessive formalism of the second and the first.
Who is Andrii Dovbenko?
In 2014, the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project journalist association published financial documents of the Party of Regions as part of the Yanukovych Leaks. In these documents, Andrii Dovbenko appears as one of Kurchenko’s lawyers.
In 2017, a new star lit up in the Ukrainian legal firmament — the Evris law firm. This hope for the revival of ethics in the legal business was founded by Kurchenko’s ex-lawyer Andrii Dovbenko. Three years later, the company merged with LCF.
Five years ago, we wrote a story about how Andriy stopped executive proceedings and fought with private executor Ivan Zhabotynskyi.
And you could also see a video in which the drunken then head of the president’s office, Mr. Bohdan, dances at someone’s wedding in Saint-Tropez. So it was the wedding of Andrii Dovbenko and Anna Ohrenchuk.
And why is the UBA here?
The managing partner of LCF, which absorbed Dovbenko’s Evris, was and is Anna Ohrenchuk, the current president of the Ukrainian Bar Association. And Dovbenko is defended, as we wrote above, by the former three-time president of the UBA and Kurchenko’s lawyer, Denys Bugay.
Since both the former and current presidents of the UBA are very closely related to Andrii Dovbenko, whose reputation, in our very subjective opinion, is the opposite of crystal clear, we thought why not and suddenly the leadership of the UBA shares our opinion? And we talked to some of them.
All of them reported that this situation is not discussed at the board. One of the interlocutors said that they do not discuss it, probably because the elections of the UBA leadership are approaching and no one wants to raise this issue. Another said that the issue was not on the agenda because there were other important issues. Some have said that NABU’s reputation has reached an all-time low, which is why the board does not take it seriously.
In response to our request, Anna Ohrenchuk, dropped a link to last year’s press release of the UBA. We publish this specific and decisive text in full:
On December 30, 2022, the Ukrainian Bar Association (UBA) learned from the mass media about the announcement of suspicion in criminal proceedings, and later — the wanted announcement of UBA member Andrii Dovbenko. Mindful of the presumption of innocence, the Association expects a full and comprehensive investigation and fair trial of the criminal proceedings in question.
At the same time, we declare that zero tolerance for corruption and compliance with legal ethics remain the fundamental principles on which the Association is built. We remain committed to our mission of strengthening the rule of law and protecting human rights, as well as developing the legal profession in accordance with the highest international standards and practices.
Well, another member of the board hinted that our question sounds shitty and took a screenshot of the page with the board of Dead Lawyers, thus probably alluding to our material about Andrii Kobolyev. The situations are really similar in form, so read how we got out of the conflict of interest situation we found ourselves in:
We also asked Andrii Stelmaschuk, former president of the UBA and current managing partner of Vasyl Kisil & Partners to comment on whether this story has a negative impact on the UBA.
Yes, this story will affect the UBA, because it is about its member and affects the head.
If there is a public discussion on this issue and the heads of the UBA take part in it, then we will rightly hear about the presumption of innocence. But the question of how it would be appropriate for the president or the board to act is beyond the legal dimension. In terms of value, their decision will reflect their current level of understanding of goodness and justice.
I think that the president of the UBA will go beyond the procedures stipulated by the statute and decide to withdraw from the UBA until the investigation is completed. This step will demonstrate the maturity of the UBA community and will be a powerful signal to other communities of lawyers. The UBA board will not have to make any decisions.
In criminal practice, there are cases of the use of the “ghosting” defense tactic. I think that the leadership of the UBA will not be tempted to make the wrong decision that this story does not concern them, not to react at all or to react completely weakly, and in this way “ghost”.
On the one hand, we really want to write our own opinion. Moreover, authoritative representatives of the legal market throw us additional information, “but Dovbenko this, and Dovbenko that”, while refusing to comment publicly. But no, because now is the time for the anti-corruption vertical to prove what the respected partners of law firms know, but do not say publicly, in a beautiful and legal way, and not as usual.
Well, and, maybe, now is the time for these knowledgeable partners to speak publicly somehow, thereby proving that they support the cleaning of the legal services market in general, and not only in the part of their competitors. We invite anyone who has an opinion on this matter to write to us and we will publish it.
Dear NABU bloggers, I have a question for you: why do you distort your voice so much? We strongly advise you to watch the YouTube updates of other law enforcement bloggers, the same Sternenko — they are pleasant to watch and listen to.
✍️ Dima Gadomsky, Volodymyr Petrakovsky
