Vitaly Porovsky. “Poor” judge of the Rivne region •

This exudia obviously was in poverty long before that, because, despite the salary of about 80 thousand hryvnias, he lived in a hostel and sued for a long time in order to get “comfortable housing”.

What else did the former demand in the courts? judge Vitaliy Porovsky, formerly an inspector of the department for combating the theft of socialist property, and how he managed to avoid criminal liability – read in the material.

Searchs by NABU and SBU

At the end of 2019, law enforcement officers received information that two judges of the Vladimiretsky District Court were making “necessary” decisions for money. Then, investigative and search actions were carried out for almost two months.

On February 12, 2020, employees of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Security Service of Ukraine searched the offices of judges Vitaly Porovsky and Leonid Zakrevsky in the Vladimiretsky District Court, and also searched the premises of one of the local lawyers , who was an intermediary between judges and bribe givers.

Later, the intermediary lawyer confesses to the crime, agrees with the investigation, and he is awarded a fine of 25,500 hryvnias.

Judge Leonid Zakrevskiy, who at that time was the chairman of the court, is also visited with searches at home . They find and seize dollars, euros and hryvnias. Subsequently, suspicion is announced to him and the case is sent to the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court, where it is still pending.

Leonid Zakrevsky manages to avoid the anti-corruption court for more than three years, and at such a pace, the period of prosecution may expire faster than the verdict will be announced in the case.

Two gold bars, weighing 100 grams each, were found in Judge Vitaly Porovsky's office and a bank receipt for the purchase of these bars, on which the buyer's signature. The ingots and the receipt are issued as material evidence and they are arrested, which will last until November 2020.

Commodity expertise has established that the cost of the ingots is 244 thousand 294 hryvnia.

</blockquote

They are being returned after two criminal proceedings against Porovsky had to be closed, because the Constitutional Court abolished criminal liability for crimes that incriminated the former judge.

Judges decriminalize corruption crimes

The next day after the searches, on February 13, 2020, Vitaly Porovsky writes a letter of resignation of his own free will, although he should have been fired a long time ago because he did not confirm his judicial professionalism during the certification.

Two criminal proceedings were opened against him. These are:

• declaring false information (the two ingots found in his office were not listed in any of Porovsky's electronic declarations, including the one before his dismissal);
• Issuance by a judge (judges) of a knowingly unjust verdict, decision, ruling or resolution.

But the Constitutional Court, on the proposal of 55 people's deputies, first in June 2020 recognizes Article 375 of the Criminal Code as unconstitutional: if the judge makes a deliberately unjust decision.

And in October of the same year, Article 366-1 of the Criminal Code is also made unconstitutional about unreliable declaration.

Criminal proceedings are closed, the ingots are returned to the owner, and Porovsky himself turns to the office of the Prosecutor General. He wants criminal proceedings to be opened against the NABU detective and the investigator of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office.

In his opinion, they abused their power, the ingots “were unjustifiably kept by the pre-trial investigation body”, while Porovsky, meanwhile, experienced “significant damage” for 9 months.

They say that their cost is less than it is necessary to open criminal proceedings and the found gold allegedly has nothing to do with the purpose of the search.

But the Office of the Prosecutor General does not enter information into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations. Porovsky appeals to the court to oblige him to do this. Both the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court and the Appellate Chamber of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court refuse the ex-judge.

Vitaly Porovsky. Work in Russia and scandals

Vitaly Porovsky was appointed a judge of the Vladimiretsky District Court, initially for five years – from December 24, 2004. And at the end of 2010, he became a judge for an indefinite period.

In 2016, judge Vitaly Porovsky, screaming, pushed the crew of the ICTV channel out of his office.

Then the journalist Ekaterina Kurbanova explained this incident as follows: “By his decision, he evicted a woman with two sons from the house, one of whom is a minor. So I wanted to know what laws he was guided by when he made this decision – and he was up to something.

In 2017, Vitaly Porovsky called the police on lawyer Nikolai Glotov. Judge Porovsky believed that the lawyer showed him disrespect by photographing during the meeting how he announces the decision without wearing a robe and a badge. After that, Glotov complained about Judge Porovsky to the High Council of Justice. Now Nikolai Glotov is a judge of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court.

Long before his appointment as a judge, Vitaly Porovsky worked as a policeman. In particular, in Russia.

• From November 1, 1976 to October 1, 1977, Porovsky served as a policeman of the united division of the Rivne city department of internal affairs.
• From October 8 to October 11, 1979, he worked as an inspector of the department for combating the theft of socialist property (OBKhSS) of the internal affairs department of the Kozhevnikovsky district executive committee of the Internal Affairs Directorate of the Tomsk regional executive committee (Russia) (as a senior inspector of the OBKhSS).
• From October 11, 1979 until January 3, 1980, he worked as a district police inspector of the internal affairs department of the Strezhevsky city executive committee (Tomsk region, Russia). the area that Porovsky applied for in 2019 in order to receive more judicial remuneration.

  Increased remuneration

  Vitaliy Porovsky is twice suing the Territorial Department of the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine in the Rivne region, which pays remuneration to judges.

  Porovsky complains that the SAI did not take into account his work experience in law enforcement agencies. This is 3 years and 2 months – from November 1976 to January 1980. And in this regard, he did not increase the allowance for long service, but he cannot receive additional leave.

  In 2017, the Rivne District Administrative Court refuses Porovsky.

  In March 2019, after Vitaly Porovsky received the already mentioned archival certificate from the Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Tomsk Region, the Vladimiretsky District Court issued an order to take into account more than three years of the above-mentioned police experience and transfer the judicial remuneration and increase the bonus for the length of service in August 2019.

  This order was based on a Supreme Court ruling in 2018 regarding a similar case.

  The State Antimonopoly Service again refuses to recalculate and pay Porovsky. They explain that the decision cannot serve as a basis for this, since Porovsky was appointed a judge in 2005. While this rule is valid only for judges who became judges from August 3, 2010 to January 1, 2011.

  Therefore, at the end of 2019, Vitaliy Porovsky again appeals to the Rivne District Administrative Court. And this time the claim is partially satisfied.

  They enroll the length of service as a Soviet policeman and oblige the Territorial Administration of the State Anti-Corruption Service in the Rivne Region to pay the judge an allowance for length of service, taking into account this length of service.

  Vitaly Porovsky. He sued the pension to the salary

  Since February 8, 2016, Vitaly Porovsky has been registered with the Pension Fund, where he was assigned a pension by age. At the same time, Porovsky continued to work as a judge in the Vorodimiretsky District Court.

  But the regional Pension Fund does not pay a pension to Porovsky. He explains this by the fact that, according to the law “On the Civil Service” and “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges,” pensions are not paid to those who continue to work in positions “giving the right to a pension or a monthly lifelong allowance.”

  <blockquote

  The Rivne city court refused Porovsky.

However, the Zhytomyr Administrative Court of Appeal cancels this decision, recognizes the refusal and inaction of the Rivne United Department of the Pension Fund of Ukraine of the Rivne Region as illegal and obliges to pay a pension to Porovsky. Because the norm, which the Rivne city court was guided by in its decision, was temporary and was no longer in effect at the time when Porovsky was granted a pension.

The dormitory judge and “comfortable housing”

C In 1999 and at least until 2009, Vitaliy Porovsky was in the first place to receive a free land plot in Rivne.

In February 2005, after being appointed to the position of a judge, the Vladimirets Council included Porovsky in the list of those who have the priority right to housing. He was sent to work in the Vladimiretsky District Court by distribution from another locality.

But Porovsky did not receive housing.

Therefore, in 2012, Porovsky is suing the Vladimiretsky village council, and later – and with the Vladimiretsky District State Administration and the Territorial Department of the State Judicial Administration in the Rivne Region.

But he asks to seize their accounts and prohibit providing housing to other persons until he receives an apartment.

Approximately six months before going to court, Porovsky signs an agreement to live in the dormitory of Vladimiretsky Higher Vocational School No. 29.

Where he lived all these years before the trial is unknown.

First, he is denied by the Rivne District Administrative Court. For Porovsky:

• he referred to articles of the law and resolutions of the Cabinet of Ministers, which at that time were no longer in force;
• did not keep the procedure for obtaining housing, according to which at first he should not go to court, but write a statement to the Vladimir settlement council that he was not provided with housing.

This letter had to be approved by the Territorial Administration State Judicial Administration of Ukraine and calculate the cost of this housing, and agree on an estimate – the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine. After that, the Vladimiretsky District Court must decide on the purchase of housing at the expense of the state budget and transfer it to the judge.

At the end of 2015, Judge Porovsky appealed to the Vladimir Settlement Council to be provided with housing. And again he is suing the village council for the refusal.

On March 29, 2016, the Kuznetsovsky City Court closes the proceedings in this case.

But on April 27, 2016, the Court of Appeal of the Rivne Region cancels this ruling and transfers the case back to the Kuznetsovsky City Court for further consideration.

November 29, 2016, Porovsky's claim is partially satisfied.

The Kuznetsovsky City Court ordered the Vladimirets Council to provide comfortable housing to Porovsky in Vladimirka, “in the form of a separate living quarters.”

The Vladimirets Council first files an appeal, and then withdraws it a few days before the meeting in February 2017.

p>

In May 2017, the Main Territorial Department of Justice in the Rivne region opens proceedings because the Vladimirets village council does not comply with the court decision.

And later, during 2017-2018, Porovsky complained four times about the department of justice in the Rivne region. Because he believes that the state executor is not doing anything to force the Vladimirets settlement council to provide him with housing.

All four times the Kuznetsovsky city court recognizes the actions of the state executor as unlawful, obliges him to restore the violated right of Porovsky and report on his actions in this regard about the court and the complainant no later than ten days after receiving the court ruling.

However, Porovsky does not receive housing.

After that, he appeals to the Supreme Court and cancels the decision of both courts – both the Kuznetsovsky City Court and the Rivne Court of Appeal, which awarded Porovsky housing out of turn. Because such decisions cannot be considered legal and justified. After all, there are 42 more people in line in front of Porovsky, and they have equal rights. So Porovsky cannot get housing before them.

Also in the decision, the Supreme Court indicated that, first of all, the responsibility to provide the judge with housing is on local governments. The State Judicial Administration performs only an additional function if this issue remains unresolved by the Vladimirets village council.

If the Vladimirets council could not provide housing, then it could be bought for money from the state budget and transferred to the use of a judge.

At the same time, “comfortable housing” can be either a house, or an apartment, or service housing.

Porovsky did not specify the type of housing in his claims, but asked for comfortable housing per person (almost 14 square meters) and an additional 10 square meters. And also that this should happen no later than three months after the court decision comes into force.

Since the register of electronic declarations is not available due to martial law, we cannot say exactly how much Vitaly Porovsky earned , if working as a judge for 14 years, he could not buy or rent a house in the village.

His former colleague, Judge-Speaker of the Vladimiretsky District Court Elena Ivankov, says that the judge has been living in the dormitory permanently since at least 2006.

But it is known that his monthly judicial remuneration consisted of:

• almost 50,000 hryvnia of official salary (for 2019, this is 25 living wages of citizens for able-bodied persons);
• about 25,000 hryvnia bonuses for performing particularly important work (this is 50% of the official salary with taking into account the additional payment for the qualifying class);
• about UAH 7,500 in seniority bonus (this is 10% of the total monthly salary).

We could not find Vitaliy Porovsky's phone number and his social media page to communicate with the former judge and give him the opportunity to answer questions that we had during the preparation of the material. About gold bars, about scandalous illegal behavior towards a journalist and a lawyer, about trying to be more equal than others in getting an apartment.

Judge-speaker of the Vladimiretsky District Court Elena Ivankov says that Porovsky is not on social networks, and none of his colleagues had his phone number, except for the former chairman of the court Vladimir Zakrevsky and Porovsky's assistants, who are not working in the court now.

— Vitaly Anatolyevich had a mobile phone, but maybe it sounds funny to you, but we didn’t have his number. In fact, he could not be contacted when he was absent, but he was only absent when he was on vacation or a very few times on sick leave. He was almost always at work during working hours and he did not give his mobile to anyone.

– He is not a media person at all, he always avoided this. He has always been very closed. I know that he had a mobile phone because we saw him. But numbers… We once jokingly asked if it is a normal practice in our time to exchange numbers, but he said, why do you need him, we see each other every day. He was very protective of his free time, he never communicated with us in his free time. That is, there was no common leisure, – says Elena Ivankov.

Therefore, if Vitaly Porovsky has a desire to communicate and express his vision of the above situations, we will publish his position and answers.

Anna Khinochik, translation of Skelet.Info

“Dear Ruslan Solvar”. Could corruption in the courts and medical institutions help the ex-people's deputy avoid prison?

Judge Yukhimuk, who got burned on a bribe, turned out to be the owner of three good cars and jewelry

Source