Just because he can: the HCJ did not bring to responsibility judge Kovhanych, who doubled the speed limit, threatened and ran over a policeman’s foot and fled the scene

Today, on April 17, the High Council of Justice (HCJ) concluded that Serhiy Kovhanych, a judge from the Tulchyn district court in the Vinnytsia region, should not be held accountable. Although Roman Maselko, who is a reporting member of the HCJ in this case, recommended the judge’s dismissal, members Salikhov and Burlakov disagreed, finding no fault in his conduct.

What is the matter?

This incident exemplifies the classical misuse of judicial status to evade accountability. In March 2023, judge Kovhanych was pulled over by patrol police for doubling the legal speed limit. Upon being stopped, he immediately contested the accusations, disputed the officers’ actions, and threatened legal action. Such behaviour raises questions about potential undue influence. Despite requests from the officers to remain until the incident report was completed, Kovhanych entered his vehicle and left the scene, suggesting he believed he was above the law. Moreover, he drove over a policeman’s foot while departing.

Despite the circumstances, the Disciplinary Chamber of the HCJ found no basis to hold Judge Kovhanych accountable:

“It is impossible to understand the motives behind the decision to not prosecute because Burlakov, who proposed refusing the prosecution, neither documented his proposal in writing nor announced it during the voting. Additionally, the decision has not yet been made public. HCJ member Olena Kovbiy voted against this refusal. Such circumstances give the impression that the HCJ’s priority, in this case, was not to investigate potential ethical violations but rather to shield their colleague in a mantle”, explained our lawyer Marta Bereza in a comment to Slidstvo.Info.

Additionally, the police officer who handcuffed Judge Kovhanych was dismissed and received a 3-year probation sentence, while the judge faced no consequences for his actions.

Furthermore, the decision by HCJ members Burlakov and Salikhov has resulted in the complainant being unable to appeal the HCJ’s ruling. This is not the first instance where their actions have been perceived as undermining the integrity of the body and obstructing efforts to reform the judiciary. Both Burlakov and Salikhov were appointed to the HCJ by the Congress of Judges, where circular guarantee thrives among its members.