The trial of former Square President Viktor Yanukovych, who is accused of treason, was held again. Again, stop bureaucratic delays. Obolonskiy district court of Kiev has not sent their Russian colleagues a request to conduct a sharing session with the defendant.
photo: Gennady Cherkasov
The desire of the Ukrainian justice to hold the trial in absentia, without the participation of the defendant, is not surprising. The defense may 4, failed to convince the court of the organization of the video with the former head of the Square, pushing the judges of the International Convention for the protection of human rights. In order to make a decision about the possibility of Yanukovych to participate in the process, the Ukrainian court took a whole week.
However, postponed to Thursday, the meeting never took place. Though Rostov told the court that he is ready to implement video, no requests for it from Ukraine were reported. The defendant never refused to participate in the process. Moreover, Yanukovych has repeatedly demanded his presence during the meeting via video link.
In the absence of Yanukovych, the court decided to postpone the meeting on 29 may, but it answered the defense’s refusal to arrange a video conference through the procedure of international legal assistance. “We will prepare the appeal on your refusal to the European court of human rights,” retorted the judge advocate.
The Deputy head of the Institute of CIS Vladimir ZHARIKHIN believes that the next unsuccessful attempt of the hearing is associated with the fear of official Kiev to the testimony of the former President, therefore the indictment and attempting to carry out the process in a unilateral manner:
On one side, like they need to portray a full-fledged trial, and the other — frankly they don’t want Ukrainian media replicate the performance of Yanukovych. So by all means slow down the process. A similar situation — and with the refusal to arrange a video conference through the procedure of international legal assistance. Like as he is summoned to court to attend, formally respecting the principles and provisions of the judicial process, but they fear that his testimony would become public, because they are disadvantageous to Kiev.