Medvedchuk is still an attorney. How to fix it?

Attorneys-in-law Ilya Kostin and Roman Tytykalo ask to deprive Viktor Medvedchuk of the right to practice law and call on those who are interested to join their claim

The other day, the pro-Kremlin newspaper “Izvestia” published an article in which, in the manner characteristic of this cesspool, it is once again about the West’s conflict with Russia. The author compares the relationship between Ukraine and Russia closer than the relationship between England and Scotland, but since the first Maidan in 2005, Ukraine began to build an anti-Russian policy at the level of state ideology. In addition, this policy has the pattern of the Cold War, where Ukrainians were incited against good Russians.

Anti-Russian sentiments brought nothing but grief and poverty to Ukraine. Therefore, all pro-Western nationalist movements consciously or unconsciously preach poverty and poverty to the Ukrainian people.

The champion of this two-minute hatred is the Ukrainian lawyer Vitkor Medvedchuk. The one who was stripped of Ukrainian citizenship last year and exchanged with our soldiers. The one who has been a lawyer for more years than many of our readers. The one who is known for his poor defense of dissidents Vasyl Stus, Yuri Lytvyn and Mykola Kutsevich.

Actually, there are more than enough grounds for depriving Medvedchuk of the right to practice law, even based on the above article.

The Law on the Bar and Practice of Law specifies that deprivation of the right to practice law can be applied in case of violation of the oath of a lawyer of Ukraine, systematic or gross one-time violation of the rules of lawyer ethics, which undermines the authority of the Ukrainian Bar.

And the Rules of Advocate Ethics:

• oblige the lawyer in his professional activity to comply with the legislation and not to resort to means and methods that contradict the legislation or these rules;
• oblige the lawyer to avoid publicity in mass media or dissemination of information in another way that degrades the honor and dignity of another lawyer, disgraces him or the law office/law association or the bar of Ukraine;
• oblige the lawyer in journalistic materials and public speeches not to spread information that disgraces the honor, dignity and business reputation of other lawyers, or the prestige of the legal profession as such.

It is hard to imagine what could cause more damage to the prestige of the Ukrainian legal profession than an interview with Medvedchuk or Montyan’s videos.

So, the Ukrainian legal profession is facing an exam on the possibility of self-cleansing — and this applies not only to self-governing bodies, but also to ordinary lawyers. And, in fact, the time has come to decide what is undermining the prestige of the profession — the collaborators, or the deputy minister who told the moskovite to f*ck off.

The very claim about Medvechuk is here, and here is the application to join it.

✍️Vitalik Chemerys