Close to NABOO, “Center of counteraction of corruption” Shabunina catapulted into the information space of misinformation about the trial in the so nazyvaemogo “case Martynenko”. This was stated by the lawyer Tatyana Cherezova, reports a press-service eks-the Deputy Nikolay Martynenko, reports “espresso.”
According to the defender, on the eve of the meeting of Shevchenkovsky regional court of Kiev TSPK manipulative tried to pass off a sensation supposedly change the court’s decision, which in fact has not changed. Moreover, this decision is in line with European practices and norms on human rights.
“After the last meeting of the court, these “activists” have been looking for a reason to question the objectivity of the trial. On the eve of the meeting (12 November) they came up with a super-sensation “the judges changed the order of presentation of evidence, the court went on about protection, the court decided to first introduce all the evidence, and then study them!!!” This is an outright lie. We listened to the recording of the court (which made itself PDCs) – and anyone can see this. The court listened to both sides and only after that took a logical decision about the order of consideration of evidence. In most cases the courts set such the order of presentation of evidence, it is logical and convenient to all stakeholders. And protection understand the entire scope of evidence admitted by the prosecution, and can prepare objections to evidence submitted by the Prosecutor,” – said the lawyer.
“Of course, that the defenders may not know what evidence the Prosecutor will attach to the case, so, when the Prosecutor introduces and explores the at once, this significantly delays the process. After all protection after each disputed document or other evidence will ask for a pause to provide their objections. And given the fact that in the case of six accused, the process of providing evidence may be delayed for years. It is a defense in the “case Martynenko” does everything in order not to delay the consideration of this case in the courts,” – said Tatiana Cherezova.
The lawyer said: the decisions of the European court of human rights, which handed down against Ukraine, has repeatedly pointed to the fact that Ukraine grossly violated the right to a fair trial because of the lengthy consideration of criminal proceedings.
“Therefore, the thesis PR support to the NAB that “once the hearings are held frequently, so it’s out of practice,” is also absurd and contrary to the fundamentals of the European conception of justice,” said the defender.