The case against Guzhva turns into major troubles for Lutsenko
Opposition journalist Igor Guzhva, who was detained the day before, will most likely soon be free, but major troubles await the Prosecutor General of Ukraine Yuriy Lutsenko.
This is stated in a statement by former Deputy Prosecutor General of Ukraine Renat Kuzmin.
Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at Telegram, Facebook, Classmates or In contact with
“What Igor Guzhva needs to know before the court chooses a preventive measure for him.
The crime of which he is suspected is not violent, and, therefore, the court does not have the right to arrest the chief editor without the right to post bail. In other words, Igor Guzhva cannot be arrested, he will definitely be released and will be able to continue his professional journalistic activities.
Suspicion brought by a prosecutor only means that a specific prosecutor suspects someone of committing a crime. That's all. This is not proof of the suspect's guilt. This is not a court verdict that has the force of Law throughout Ukraine. The so-called “pidozra” is the personal opinion of the prosecutor. Like, for example, a suspect’s statement about his own innocence is the suspect’s personal opinion. The procedural significance of these two documents is the same. We need to be understanding about the prosecutor’s “fags” and not panic, because prosecutors can make mistakes in good faith and carry out illegal orders from their superiors, and there have been more mentally ill people in the prosecutor’s office over the past year; in a word, they can call any inadequate text a “faggot” and hand them over anyone. And, given the lack of legal education of the Prosecutor General and the Minister of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, it would be naive to demand legal knowledge from their subordinates.
And now, in essence, the video published by the Prosecutor General is about, so to speak, “extortion of a bribe.” I will not do a detailed analysis of this film masterpiece now, everyone can draw their own conclusion, I just want to draw your attention to the following. In order for the prosecutor to be able to use this “miracle of operational video recording” as evidence, he must prove in court that:
1. The video was made in full compliance with the requirements of the law in the presence of all necessary sanctions, permits and in strict compliance with criminal procedural and investigative procedures.
2. The video recording was made on specific equipment that is legally owned by a specially authorized government agency that has the right to purchase and use this equipment.
3. The video recording has not been edited or otherwise altered.
4. The video was made within the time frame specified by the prosecutor and not at some other time.
5. The video was taken at the location specified by the prosecutor and not at another location.
6. The video shows the suspect, and not another person, for example, a police officer, made up to look like him.
7. The voice in the video belongs to the suspect, not another person.
8. The video recorded not just a conversation about prices for publications or advertising in the media, but specifically the demand of the suspect to give him a bribe with threats to publish material compromising the victim in the media.
9. The video recorded the fact of the transfer of money, and not, for example, an empty envelope or a dummy, the so-called “doll”.
10. The video recorded the fact of the transfer of exactly those bills that were subsequently found on the suspect, and not some others.
Without presenting this evidence to the court, which includes, among other things, the conclusions of complex examinations (lack of editing, identification of voices, identification of the place and time of recording, etc.), the prosecutor will not be able to use the video recording published by the Prosecutor General as evidence of the defendant’s guilt.
Igor Guzhva also needs to know that the Criminal Code provides for liability not only for receiving a bribe, but also for giving a bribe, as well as for provoking a bribe by law enforcement officers with the aim of subsequently “exposing” the bribe-taker. The law also provides for criminal liability for falsifying evidence and bringing criminal charges against someone who is known to be innocent. In addition, criminal liability has been established for illegal search, i.e. a search conducted without court approval, in the absence of grounds for its conduct, in violation of the procedure for its conduct, in the absence of the suspect’s lawyers, in the absence of attesting witnesses or with attesting law enforcement officers or other interested persons, conducted after 22 p.m., etc. By the way, everything seized, including the subject of a bribe, during an illegal search cannot be used as the basis for a conviction.
And lastly, on the topic “Who are the judges?” A criminal case has been opened regarding the appointment of Lutsenko as prosecutor general for a bribe of several million US dollars. A criminal case was also opened on the fact that Lutsenko received a $150 bribe from MP Shepelev for stopping the investigation against him. A criminal case was also opened on the fact that Prosecutor General Lutsenko illegally organized an illegal criminal prosecution of me, as a prosecutor who had previously investigated cases of corruption crimes by Lutsenko himself. A criminal case has been opened against Lutsenko for the illegal dismissal of a prosecutor who refused to fabricate a case against me on Lutsenko’s order. And as many as eight (!) criminal cases have been opened against the investigators who conducted an illegal search at my place.
Today, the ex-head of the Public Council of the Prosecutor General's Office, Vladimir Boyko, published information that Yuriy Lutsenko, then the editor-in-chief of Grani-plus, extorted and received a bribe in the amount of $50 from the first vice-speaker of parliament Gennady Vasilyev, threatening the latter to publish incriminating statements about him materials. On Monday I will send a statement to the head of NABU to initiate a criminal case against Lutsenko regarding this fact as well. I hope that the journalistic community and simply concerned citizens will not ignore this event and will show the same integrity as in the case of the editor-in-chief of “Strana” Igor Guzhva on charges of bribery,” writes Kuzmin.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.