The prosecutor’s office challenged the decision of the court in the case of Poroshenko

The Office of the Prosecutor General filed an appeal against the court’s decision to impose a preventive measure against the fifth President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko. This was reported by the press service of the UCP.

“Prosecutors will insist on the application of a preventive measure in the form of detention with the alternative of posting a bail in the amount of UAH 1 billion against the suspect,” the report says.

It should be noted that the investigating judge of the Pechersky District Court of the capital, Aleksey Sokolov, who made a decision as the fifth president, Petro Poroshenko, was suppressed, suddenly took a vacation the next day.

Petro Poroshenko’s lawyer Ilya Novikov said that he had already filed an appeal, as he believes that any measure of restraint is not legal, because the suspicion is not justified.

Another defender of the fifth president, Igor Golovan, said that on February 3, the court would consider an appeal against the arrest of Poroshenko’s property.

Trial in Poroshenko’s case

• On January 17, the trial of Petro Poroshenko started. He is accused of high treason and assistance to the activities of terrorist organizations “DNR” and “LNR”. Poroshenko is suspected of taking part in a criminal scheme for the supply of coal from the temporarily occupied territories for a total amount of about 1.5 billion hryvnias.
• On the day of the trial, Judge Sokolov, who is supposed to announce the decision on the measure of restraint to Petro Poroshenko, allegedly became ill. Soon, the office of the Pechersk District Court of Kiev denied the information, they reported that Sokolov was in the deliberation room. He stayed there for 5 hours. The prosecutor’s office asked the court to choose a measure of restraint for Petro Poroshenko in the form of arrest for a period of two months. As an alternative to arrest, prosecutors asked the court to set a bail for Poroshenko in the amount of one billion hryvnia. They justify this amount of bail by the size of the damage caused, the property status of the politician and the nature of the criminal case. However, the court could not choose a measure of restraint for Poroshenko, the decision on the case was postponed to January 19 at 14:00.
• On January 19, Sokolov chose Poroshenko a measure of restraint in the form of a personal obligation. He also assigned a number of procedural duties to Poroshenko.
• Political scientist Ruslan Bortnik believes that one of the reasons why the court did not send Poroshenko to a pre-trial detention center or under house arrest is the persistent recommendations of the United States. The White House believes that now is not the time to arrange political showdowns and split the people inside the country, at a time when Russian tanks and a 100,000-strong military contingent are stationed on the border. In addition, there were many supporters of Poroshenko near the Pechersky court. If they had arrested him and tried to take him out of court in a paddy wagon, fights between the protesters and the police could have broken out and it is not known what the confrontation would have escalated into.

Earlier, the Segodnya website found out for what other reasons the court turned out to be loyal to the fifth president of Ukraine and why it did not impose a severe preventive measure on the politician suspected of treason.