A judge with a Russian passport – no punishment and a chance for lifetime retirement

A Russian passport in her pocket, a lifetime pension from Ukraine in sight – this is what “justice” looks like from the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court. The High Council of Justice (HCJ) cancelled the dismissal of Arina Litvinova, a judge of the District Administrative Court of Kyiv (DACK) who held a Russian passport, following a decision of the Supreme Court.

Journalists from Schemes earlier discovered that Arina Litvinova, born in Yekaterinburg, held a valid Russian passport at least until autumn 2024. In addition, the judge of the now-liquidated District Administrative Court of Kyiv is known for other “achievements”:

• In 2017, as part of a panel, she ruled in the Surkis brothers’ case against PrivatBank and ordered the bank to pay more than one billion hryvnias in favour of the Surkises and their company.

• She sabotaged the qualification assessment in 2019, when, together with her DACK colleagues, she repeatedly failed to appear for interviews at the HQCJ, allegedly due to “incapacity.”

• Like many DACK judges, Litvinova possesses considerable assets of questionable origin, including an apartment with a market value of around 5 million UAH.

The Second Disciplinary Chamber of the HCJ recognised the judge’s foreign citizenship as a violation and recommended her dismissal. Later, the HCJ in full upheld that decision and stripped Litvinova of her judicial robe. Litvinova filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court, and the Grand Chamber decided that the evidence of her Russian citizenship was supposedly insufficient, therefore, the disciplinary sanction must be annulled.

The HCJ, bound to comply with the Grand Chamber’s ruling, closed the disciplinary proceedings. Responsibility lies fully with the Supreme Court. Now Litvinova has a chance to take “honourable” retirement with lifetime benefits, if the court supports her lawsuit for reinstatement to the judicial staff.

This is not the first time the Supreme Court has undermined the results of judicial reform by cancelling HCJ decisions. It once again proves: the Supreme Court itself requires profound renewal. Moreover, the Grand Chamber is currently reviewing the claim of Litvinova’s former chief, the notorious Pavlo Vovk, against his dismissal. If he is reinstated, it will become the clearest proof that the Supreme Court is still under the control of corrupt judicial elites and is in urgent need of cleansing.