- Dishonesty
- Scandals
- Link
- Media about:
(presence of circumstances indicating a probable violation by the pursuer of the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption"):
Opacity of wealth
1) In the declaration for 2014 year, there is no information about whether the judge or his family has the right of ownership or the right to use real estate in which one can live permanently. The legislation obliges to declare real estate owned by the judge and members of his family as private property or leased or with other right of use. Thus, the judge should declare the housing in which he lives (uses) on any grounds.
2) In the declaration for 2014 year there are no data on the apartment with a total area of 51.2 sq.m., the right of use of which was acquired on 15.09.2011, as stated in the electronic declarations for 2015 and 2016 years
- Making questionable decisions As can be seen from conclusion Judge Bugil of the Temporary Special Commission for Reviewing Judges of Courts of General Jurisdiction chose a preventive measure in the form of detention for two months against the journalist of "Road Control" and Euromaidan activist Andrii Dzindza in connection with the events that took place during the protest action on December 1, 2013 along the street Bankova in Kyiv. In addition, Judge Bugil issued two decisions authorizing the search of the premises belonging to the Euromaidan activist Kadura. The temporary special commission arrived conclusion, that the selection of preventive measures in the form of detention against Dzindzi A.I. contradicts the norms of the Constitution of Ukraine, the Criminal Code of Ukraine, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. It was also established that the decrees on conducting searches do not meet the requirements of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. However, the Supreme Council of Justice did not agree with conclusion Temporary special commission and decided, that the said conclusion does not contain sufficient arguments that would call into question the objectivity and impartiality of judge Bugil V.V. during the consideration and making of court decisions in the cases concerning Dzindzi and Kadura and were grounds for his dismissal from office for violating the judge's oath . According to the results of the review by the High Council of Justice, was refused in submitting a submission to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine to dismiss Bugil from his post for violating the judge's oath.
- Violation of rights and freedoms As reported Radio Svoboda, judge Bugil accused Andrii Dzindzi's lawyer Victor Smaliy of an attempt on his (the judge's) life during the hearing in the Dzindzi case. Based on the testimony of the judge, Smalia was detained and remanded in custody for 2 months.
- Unethical behavior The declaration of integrity, which judges must submit annually, contains information on making decisions on choosing preventive measures in the form of detention, leaving them unchanged, extending the term of detention, convictions against persons who were participants in mass protests in the period from November 21, 2013 until the day this Law of Ukraine "On Restoring Confidence in the Judiciary in Ukraine" enters into force, in connection with their participation in such actions. However, Judge Bugil is in his own declarations of integrity pointed out that he did not make such decisions, despite the fact that he is a judge was accepted a decision to apply a preventive measure in the form of detention to a participant in protest actions. Thus, the judge was provided with inaccurate information in the declaration of integrity.
Disciplinary sanctions and punishments:
The information is being clarified
As reported by the publication "Ukrainian Pravda", in December 2011, Judge Bugil conducted a criminal case against Tax Maidan activists who were accused of damaging the cobblestones on Independence Square in the fall of 2010. The case was closed already after Yanukovych fled, only at the end of March 2014.
As reported by the publication "Censor-NOT", judge Bugil chose a preventive measure in the form of bail in the amount of UAH 22,940 for the athlete from Bila Tserkva Vadym Titushko (Romania), who on May 18, 2014 attacked journalists Olga Snitsarchuk and Vlad Sodel.
As reported by the publication "Ukrainian Pravda", in November 2011, judge Bugil ruled resolution on the closing of the criminal case against the judge's assistant Natalya Solovei, who, being in a state of alcoholic intoxication, hit Svetlana Teterevkova, the mother of three children, to death with a jeep. As stated in resolution, the basis for closing the criminal case and releasing the accused from criminal responsibility was the corresponding submission to the investigators based on Law of Ukraine "On Amnesty in 2011".
As informs NGO "Anti-corruption Center", on February 14, 2019, judge Bugil presided over the panel of judges, which decided decision about the seizure of 300,000 dollars of Roman Nasirov, the ex-head of the State Fiscal Service, which are on his account in the Bank of Great Britain. We will remind that the detectives of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine accuse Roman Nasirov of abuse official position regarding the provision of illegal installments of tax payments to companies associated with People's Deputy Oleksandr Onishchenko, who is currently hiding from the investigation abroad. As a result of these decisions, the Nasir state suffered losses in the total amount of more than UAH 2 billion.
Related cases
Sternenko's case
Serhii Sternenko is an Odessa public figure, lawyer and blogger. In Odessa, he was attacked 3 times, during the last one Serhiy wounded one of the attackers, Ivan Kuznetsov, who later died.