The fight was not ordered, or Who actually did not allow Kyiv lawyers to attend the Congress of Lawyers of Ukraine
Congress of Lawyers of Ukraine
The small tourist town of Mukachevo will remember lawyers for a long time: not only did the Third Congress of Lawyers of Ukraine take place there, but there was also a scandal. True, it was brought from the capital by the Kyiv delegation of lawyers, which, having failed to disrupt the congress, simply ignored it, blaming, traditionally, the central bodies of lawyer self-government.
It is curious that the holding of an event of such a scale in Transcarpathia was known back in October – the Council of Lawyers of Ukraine designated Mukachevo as the venue for the congress on October 24 of this year, when it became known that the President of Ukraine had signed the Law “On the Prosecutor’s Office”, to which lawyers were obliged in the 30s. day period to appoint a representative to the Qualification and Disciplinary Commission of Prosecutors.
But only a week before the event, statements began to appear from the most influential Transcarpathian of Ukraine, Viktor Baloga, that he had nothing to do with the meeting, and recommended that it not be held in Mukachevo. It was probably possible to do so, but the announcement that the lawyers should have seen in the central newspaper at least 20 days before the congress clearly stated that the congress would take place in the Eventum Hall in Mukachevo.
In addition, advance payment for rent and maintenance has already been made by the National Bar Association. Therefore, none of the lawyers expected that the contract would be violated. But nothing is impossible for those in power, especially if the rented premises belong to your son, and the owners of other large objects are afraid of you. On November 19, on the eve of the convention, when the organizers arrived to prepare for the registration of delegates, they were told that the premises were being renovated and the prepayment money had been returned.
The next morning, the accountant confirmed that the money had been returned, but this did not solve the problem with holding the congress. In a small town there are not many premises capable of accommodating 300 people, and the owners of those 14 that were quickly found initially agreed to accommodate the lawyers, but literally a couple of minutes later shyly apologized and refused.
As a result, only the Agrarian College, which is in no way subordinate to local authorities, agreed to provide its assembly hall for the congress. Ultimately, the event took place there.
But let’s return to the capital’s lawyers, who claim that they were not notified of the change of location and were not allowed to attend the congress at all. Lawyers from Kyiv, like other delegations, arrived at the initially announced place, and they, like everyone else, were indeed not allowed into Eventum Hall. Only for some reason other delegations registered and then boarded buses to get to the new venue. The Kiev delegation completely refused to register and move anywhere, and as a result, the bus booked for them left half empty.
Instead, lawyers from Kiev called the police and demanded that a protocol be drawn up not allowing them to participate in the work of the highest body of lawyer self-government. The National Association, which the head of the capital’s bar has long blamed for all the problems of Kyiv lawyers, was blamed for the violation, forgetting that this very association is formed by all Ukrainian lawyers without exception, that is, Kyiv ones too.
At the same time, Kyiv lawyers began to explain their behavior by the fact that they did not want to be allowed to attend the congress in full (they insisted on 60 delegates, while the Council of Lawyers of Ukraine confirmed the right of Kiev residents to only 34 representatives), that the venue was changed secretly from them, and that a congress held at a different address is not legitimate. Regarding the last argument, there is a compelling counter-argument: the congress itself voted to change the address of the congress, and those lawyers who could not register near Eventum Hall, but arrived at the Agricultural College, were allowed by the congress to participate in the work.
But constructive work at the congress was clearly not part of the plans of the people of Kiev. Therefore, after talking with the police, they went for a walk around Mukachevo and made up terrible stories about the violation of their rights by the congress of lawyers. For example, that the congress illegally elects members of the High Council of Justice. Such information was disseminated even before the approval of the agenda by the Congress in order to excite minds – after all, the question of the composition of the audit commission of the legal profession, which the Congress considered, would not have caused such a resonance, but about the High Council of Justice – easily.
The only nuance is that the congress did not consider this issue. Moreover, precisely because of the absence of a final decision made by the Supreme Administrative Court in the case of appealing decisions on the appointment of members of the HCJ by the Congress of Lawyers of Ukraine on April 26-27 of this year, a break was announced in the work of the congress until such a decision was made. That is, when it becomes clear whether lawyers need to elect new representatives to the HCJ or not.
In addition to the issue of their audit commission, the lawyers also elected a representative to the Qualification Disciplinary Commission of Prosecutors – Anatoly Kovalenko, and approved appeals to various authorities on their lawyer issues.
There were no extraordinary or resonant questions. There were no fights or incidents like at the congress in Odessa. There was simply no one to accommodate them – the main provocateurs themselves abandoned the fight for their ideals. Instead of defending the rights of lawyers from Kyiv at the Congress, the highest collegial body of lawyer self-government, Inna Rafalskaya chose to take the confrontation outside the bar: to the street, in the media, in the courts… Apparently, someone doesn’t want lawyers to work calmly, without scandals, or this someone simply cannot work constructively.
The most curious thing about all this is that this someone deprived the Kyiv, and at the same time the Poltava lawyers who supported them (a delegation of lawyers from the Poltava region registered, but did not receive mandates, since they did not go to the congress, showing up only at the banquet at the end of the event), lawyers of the representation and at the continuation of the Third Congress of Lawyers, which will precisely consider the issue of members of the High Council of Justice, no new delegates will be elected. Was this not done in order to again create the opportunity to challenge the decision of the congress and continue to block the work of the HCJ for an indefinite period? In whose interests is this?
Today it is obvious that it is definitely not in the interests of society and the new government.
Based on materials from LiveJournal novosti-o
SKELET-info