Judge Mazurenko may face criminal liability for issuing decisions for draft dodgers

Judge Mazurenko may face criminal liability for issuing decisions for draft dodgers

The High Council of Justice has appealed to the Office of the Prosecutor General regarding the registration of a criminal case against Judge Vyacheslav Mazurenko of the Ingulets District Court of Kryvyi Rih.

This is stated in the decision of the HCJ dated August 21.

In March 2023, Judge Mazurenko recognized the fact of a father independently raising and supporting a child. The decision was motivated by the need for the man to take the child out of a country where hostilities are ongoing to a safe place abroad.

Later, the appellate court overturned this decision. The mother provided copies of foreign passports and a residence permit as evidence that the child was already living with her abroad.

The woman also filed a complaint with the High Council of Justice, suggesting that her ex-husband was attempting to avoid mobilization by fleeing abroad with a purchased court decision or trying to deceive the military enlistment office by claiming to be the sole caregiver and provider for the child.

At the same time, such a court decision would create problems for the mother and child when crossing the border upon returning to Ukraine. Additionally, due to this decision, they would lose alimony.

The complainant pointed out that her ex-husband had submitted four similar claims to the court, three of which were withdrawn until the case was assigned to Judge Mazurenko.

Subsequently, the case was heard in the absence of the mother in a record time of 7 days. The woman claims she did not submit any requests for the case to be considered without her. Judge Mazurenko took into account a statement allegedly submitted on her behalf, which was not certified with a digital signature.

HCJ member Serhiy Burlakov was the rapporteur on the complaint and prepared a conclusion recommending against holding Judge Mazurenko accountable. In his opinion, the judge had only made a good-faith judicial error, and there was no evidence of a disciplinary offense in his actions.

The Disciplinary Chamber of the HCJ did not support Burlakov’s conclusion. Instead, at the suggestion of HCJ member Roman Maselko, circumstances were established that may indicate signs of another disciplinary misconduct.

The HCJ requested information from the Ingulets District Court of Kryvyi Rih regarding similar cases handled by Judge Mazurenko in 2022-2024.

It was revealed that Judge Mazurenko had handled 16 such cases concerning the establishment of facts about a minor child living with the father and being independently raised and supported by him.

The investigation showed that in five cases, the children were already living abroad with their mothers at the time of the court proceedings.

However, after obtaining such court decisions, the men either left the country or received a deferment from mobilization.

The average time for considering these cases ranged from 5 to 13 days. One case was even resolved just 2 days after the proceedings were initiated.

Contrary to the law, the judge did not involve the guardianship and custody authority in the proceedings.

The cases were considered in the absence of the parties, including interested persons. Only one case was heard with the participation of the applicant’s representative and a witness.

Judge Mazurenko disregarded the fact that statements from interested parties about considering the cases in their absence and not objecting to the claims were submitted via email and were not signed with an electronic digital signature. Therefore, these statements could not be taken into account by the court.

In almost all cases, the interests of the applicants were represented by the same lawyers.

The HCJ believes that the court decisions may have been made based on forged documents and with the aim of creating conditions for draft-eligible men to evade mobilization.