On October 14, the HACC Appeals Chamber held a hearing in the case of Ihor Petryk, a former judge of the Kyiv Administrative Court of Appeals. He is charged with receiving a $5,000 unlawful benefit for issuing a court decision in the interests of a commercial company regarding its license to dispose of hazardous waste.

On July 9, 2026, the HACC found Petryk guilty and sentenced him to 7 years’ imprisonment, with a 3-year ban on holding public office and confiscation of property.

The defense presented its arguments. The defense attorney asked the court to overturn the verdict, citing bias on the part of the HACC panel and numerous procedural violations. She stressed that the judges had groundlessly rejected recusal motions, even though they had previously heard a similar case against another judge involving the same witness-complainant, Ostapenko.

The defense maintains that the then-head of SAPO unlawfully signed Petryk’s notice of suspicion and the orders extending the investigation abroad, in Panama and the United States, serving the defendant with only a copy, and that, contrary to the rules on investigative jurisdiction, the case itself was not transferred to NABU for almost five months.

The lawyer also argued that the crime had been provoked without any element of extortion, and that Ostapenko’s testimony was inadmissible, as he had been questioned by video link from the street without proper identification and without taking an oath in court. The defense further rejected accusations of delaying the proceedings, noting that the trial had been suspended because of the defendant’s military service in the combat zone.

The defense pointed to the invalidity of the notice of suspicion itself, citing an expert examination which found that the then-SAPO head’s signature had been forged by imitation or reproduced as a photocopy sent via a messenger app, with no original document in existence.

By the defense’s calculations, the pre-trial investigation period had already expired in early March 2017, meaning all subsequent procedural decisions and the referral of the case to court took place outside it. The defense also asked the court to declare the records of the detention and of the search of the judge’s office inadmissible. Their arguments included the absence of the mandatory technical recording of the hearing at the Solomianskyi District Court when the investigative action was authorized, the missed deadline for serving the notice of suspicion after the actual detention, and the fact that the defense had not reviewed the full video recording of the search.

Ihor Petryk himself insists he took no bribe. He spoke about his long professional career and said he had always acted within the law. Petryk also emphasized the procedural violations raised by the defense. The defendant is convinced that he was targeted for revenge, with this case fabricated against him, over cases he had heard as a judge. Petryk noted that he had never abused his procedural rights or delayed the trial, and that even during his military service he had done everything he could to assist the court.

Statements by the defendant and the prosecutor will continue on October 21.

Note that the statute of limitations in the case expires on December 1, 2026. The case had been before the HACC since November 2019. From November 2022 to May 2023, the proceedings were suspended due to Petryk’s service in the Armed Forces of Ukraine.