Judge made 8 decisions against Revolution of Dignity, but still works at High Anti-Corruption Court – Office for Purification of Judicial System published information

The Office for the Purification of the Judicial System has identified Inna Bilous, a judge of the High Anti-Corruption Court, who in 2013 banned the Ternopil Maidan and canceled 7 decisions of local authorities that supported the Revolution of Dignity. However, neither public activists nor international experts are responding to the revealed facts, according to a post on the Office's page.

As reported, on December 10, 2013, Inna Bilous, while serving as a judge of the Ternopil District Administrative Court, banned a number of parties from holding peaceful assemblies in the Ternopil Region until January 7, 2014. She also canceled 7 decisions of local authorities that supported the Revolution of Dignity.

However, the post notes that Bilous surprisingly passed all the necessary checks both as a judge of the Ternopil District Administrative Court and during her appointment as a judge of the High Anti-Corruption Court.

"Members of the Public Integrity Council Roman Maselko and Mykhailo Zhernakov did not write a single post about the judge who banned the Ternopil Maidan (the second largest after Kyiv). There are no negative posts or appeals, and the Public Council of International Experts turned a blind eye to these facts, recognizing the judge as righteous for the High Anti-Corruption Court. Friends can be forgiven for this...", the Office for the Purification of the Judicial System emphasized.

Lawyer Rostyslav Kravets commented on the journalists' data.

"It seems that the activists have gone out on themselves and the sale of the positions of High Anti-Corruption Court judges, custom-made and purchased decisions have already become completely obvious," he wrote.

At the same time, journalists drew attention to the selective approach: Bilous was not dismissed for the things for which to a lesser extent other judges were dismissed. Facts like this led to a request to the Constitutional Court to check the constitutionality of involving international experts in the selection of anti-corruption, law enforcement, and judicial bodies. Lawyer Oleh Shram wrote about this on his Telegram channel.

The professional legal community has long been sounding the alarm that the High Anti-Corruption Court, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, and activists on grants have created a system of mutual cover, which allows judges to violate the law with impunity. As a result, the fight against corruption becomes ineffective and raises legitimate questions among Ukraine’s donor states.