“The leadership of the Ukrainian National Bar Association has never condemned the invasion of Russia, never requested that the traitors be brought to justice. The Bar Council, chaired by Lidia Izovitova and secretary Ihor Kolesnik, announced in response to numerous requests that they would assess the actions of traitorous lawyers “after the end of martial law,” Kostin says.
And this is not just the position of one veteran lawyer. The same can be seen in the report of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives: “The Bar of Ukraine. Lessons from the First Years of Self-Governance”. International partners, who are informed by the public sector, also know about this.
Screenshot of the report by the Agency for Legislative Initiatives that the UNBA has not made any statements to protect the rights of lawyers in the occupied territories
Representatives of the Zmina organization emphasize the same point. The Bar Council of Ukraine (UNBA) ignored their appeal, signed by the chairman of the board, Tetiana Pechonchyk.
Izovitova cannot influence public organizations and their position. But with regard to lawyers, she uses the tools at her disposal. “Now she and the Secretary of the Bar Council Ihor Kolesnik, members of the Council Serhiy Osyka and Vitaliy Serdyuk are trying to bring me to justice for criticizing the activities of members of the bar self-government bodies and accusing them of collaboration. In their opinion, this degrades the authority of the bar.
Kolesnik is still a partner of Rybin (a well-known lawyer of Medvedchuk and Sharii); Serdyuk, by the way, was, and maybe still is, Yanukovych’s lawyer. There is also a certain head of the Transcarpathian Bar Council, Fazekosh, who is close to Izovitova. He also filed a complaint against me. He is a defender of the “FSB in robes” and a supporter of the federal structure of Ukraine. By a strange coincidence, Medvedchuk, in fact, in parallel with all this, is appealing the decision to deprive him of his lawyer status, which we initiated,” Kostin says.
Lawyer Fozekosh at the event of the Ukrainian Choice, a political initiative of the traitor Medvedchuk, screenshot from Youtube
Kostin is not the only one who fell out of favor with the system. Lawyer Artem Donets, now an officer in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, has a similar story.
Lawyer Artem Donets, an officer of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Donbas 2023
He, in his turn, started standing his ground against the Association’s business. He launched a survey among his colleagues to find out whether they were satisfied with their studies at the Higher School of Advocacy of the Ukrainian National Bar Association. Most of the respondents, more than 700 lawyers, are not satisfied with the fact that they are required to pay money to a private organization, the Higher School of Advocacy, which the Association has essentially granted monopoly powers.
“We need to learn. However, this process must be organized in a quality manner. And this Higher School of the National Bar Association should not be a monopolist, but a service organization. I wish to be willing to study there instead of being forced, especially if it is paid for by my dues and course fees. They performed it terribly. Even the technical side is not at the proper level. And it is impossible to find out how much money they receive from lawyers for this “advanced training”. They have classified the information,” says Donets, who was not even able to familiarize himself with the complaint on the basis of which he was disbarred for six months.
As for the contributions of lawyers, in 2023 this amount consists of two parts: 70% (1878.80 UAH) is paid to the account of the Bar Council of the region and 30% (805.20 UAH) is paid to the account of the National Bar Association of Ukraine.
Donets emphasizes that almost everyone is now accepted as a lawyer, and this deforms the professional level of the community: “The number of lawyers has doubled since Izovitova’s appointment. At the same time, this does not mean the quality. There is a reason why they give certificates to those who have been thrown out even by the law enforcement system or the courts – former prosecutors, and police officers, to whom even the heads of these bodies had questions. This has been going on for the last 10 years. And society must understand that it is these lawyers, to whom there are no questions, who go to court to defend the “FSB in robes,” emphasizes Donets.
The pressure on those lawyers who defend the profession and disagree with the current state of affairs in the bar became possible after the current leaders of the Bar introduced an article into the rules of legal ethics that prohibits lawyers from criticizing the bar self-government bodies.
Currently, Ukraine has a law on the Bar and Practice of Law. This law should be amended to demonopolize the situation. This is what Artem Donets says: “In Ukraine, there are many universities that graduate doctors. Just imagine that there is one single organization that permits a graduate to become a doctor or not. And we have only one such organization for lawyers. There should be several associations, and they should have a body responsible for controlling access to the profession.”
The Verkhovna Rada Committee on Legal Policy, headed by Denys Maslov, and the specialized subcommittee headed by Volodymyr Vatras, are responsible for such issues. Both MPs are “servants of the people.”
Vatras notes that one should not label the constitutional institution based solely on the opinions of individual disgruntled representatives on social media. The MP emphasizes that it is worth studying specific decisions of the Association and advises lawyers to go to court: “The Association and its head Lidiya Izovitova do not make decisions on bringing lawyers to justice. According to the Law “On the Bar and Practice of Law”, this is the responsibility of the qualification and disciplinary commissions of the regional bar, which act according to the procedure also defined by the law. These commissions are not formed by the center but are elected by the lawyers themselves in the regions. The Higher Qualification and Disciplinary Commission reviews the decisions of the regional qualification and disciplinary commissions in case of a complaint. However, its decisions can also be appealed in court. In other words, the final control over the fairness of the decisions is always exercised by the court.”
As for the current law, Vatras emphasizes that it was adopted in 2012 and is in line with European integration, and its compliance with high standards has been confirmed by the Venice Commission, but adds: “However, certain provisions of the law need to be improved: strengthening of the legal profession, the introduction of a simplified taxation and reporting system for lawyers.”
Attorney Kostin appeals: the leadership of the Association, which has remained unchanged for 10 years, clearly embodies the expression “Everything to friends, the law to enemies.” The veteran lawyer adds that any conference without the consent of the National Association’s leadership is considered illegal.
“Therefore, Mr. Vatras’s statement is designed for dummies. There is a reform of justice without a reform of the bar. And the bar is part of the justice system. This is stated in the Constitution. But it is not only about the bar, it is also about the fact that to preserve our statehood, we need to overcome the fifth column of pro-Russian forces. To do this, we need to create a temporary investigative commission to investigate the influence of pro-Russian forces on the bar system and corruption schemes (budgets of hundreds of millions). And this should be done immediately! There should be a new legislative initiative, and work is already underway,” Kostin said.
Because the parliament has not yet developed a high-quality legislative framework, and Medvedchuk has had influence on the bar, Ukraine has been facing systemic problems with judicial reform for several decades. And the bar cannot develop independently and efficiently.
Darya Pysarenko, Executive Director of the NGO “Lawyer of the Future,” confirms that it is extremely necessary to change the legislation: “Even though the bar is self-governing, the state can change the legislation. What is needed here is an initiative from the bar itself – the voice of a critical number of lawyers who will be heard by the parliament. However, even now we can and should change the situation. Currently, the bar self-government bodies are “overdue”. In fact, the Bar is almost the only self-governing institution in Ukraine that, citing martial law, does not hold elections and continues to exercise its powers. Prosecutors have elected self-governing bodies. A new High Council of Justice has been elected, which, by the way, has no representatives only from the bar, because elections have not been held. There are many reasons for this. Only a proactive majority of the bar can change them. This is influenced by many factors, including the existence of an article of the Rules of Attorney Ethics, which actually prohibits criticizing the bar self-government bodies.”
Special to Hlavkom.
