Ukhanenko Serhiy Anatoliyovych

Position: judge of the Administrative Court of Cassation

Date and place of birth:

The information is being clarified

Information about relatives:

Wife: Ukhanenko Larysa Danylivna (lawyer)

Children: Ukhanenko Anastasia Sergeevna

Education:

The information is being clarified

Information about work (when, where worked, in what positions):

• On December 5, 2000, he was appointed a judge of the Krasnogvardiyskyi District Court of the city of Dnipropetrovsk.
• On February 22, 2007, he was elected a judge of the Dnipropetrovsk Administrative Court of Appeal for an indefinite term.
• Since 2019, he has been appointed as a judge of the Administrative Court of Cassation within the Supreme Court.

Violation of legislation within the framework of the case:
The panel of judges of the Cassation Administrative Court, consisting of the presiding judge Ukhanenko S. A. and judges Kashpur O. V. and Sokolov V. M., having considered the case of Leonid Chemodanov, adopted a decision that actually legitimized a gross violation of fundamental human rights. The court legalized the deprivation of the legal residence status of a person who had been defending Ukraine with weapons in hand since 2014, based on administrative formalism and unverified information from law enforcement sources related to the aggressor state. The Supreme Court recognized as permissible the restriction of human rights without a guilty verdict, effectively ignoring the presumption of innocence and allowing the use of materials from closed criminal proceedings. The court ignored special provisions of national legislation that directly guarantee the protection and right to residence of foreign volunteers, and also refused to apply the principle of proportionality, without assessing the real threat to Chemodanov's life, freedom and security in the event of his deportation to the Russian Federation. Thus, the Supreme Court's decision sets a dangerous precedent, whereby the state effectively punishes its defenders, legalizes legal persecution through formal instructions, and paves the way for the use of the judicial system as a tool of indirect political persecution, which is incompatible with the standards of the European Convention on Human Rights and the practice of the ECHR.

Involvement in cases that had a public resonance (in which case was he noticed, status within this case, year, month):

In the materials of public control (in particular, in the opinion of the Public Integrity Council), Ukhanenko S.A. is linked to the context of the ECHR case “Lazarenko and Others v. Ukraine” as follows: during his work in the appellate administrative jurisdiction, the decision/approach of the relevant appellate court in a number of proceedings became the subject of assessment by the ECHR, and the Court found a violation of paragraph 1 of Article 6 of the Convention due to improper notification of the participants (which deprived the parties of the opportunity to fully participate in the process and implement the principle of equality of arms).

*The material was prepared using analytical system YouControl