LCF Law Group Secured Dismissal of Disciplinary Proceedings Concerning Conduct Under Occupation
The Criminal Law Practice team at LCF Law Group has successfully defended a client in a complex disciplinary matter. The Second Disciplinary Chamber of the High Council of Justice declined to impose disciplinary liability and closed the proceedings.
Background
The case concerned a judge who remained in temporarily occupied territory during the early stages of the full-scale invasion. The complaint was brought by the regional prosecutor’s office, which initiated a review on the basis that the judge’s conduct may have been incompatible with judicial office or capable of undermining public confidence in the administration of justice. The only sanction available upon an adverse finding was referral for removal from the bench.
Defence Strategy
The LCF Law Group team structured its defence around two principal lines of argument. The first challenged whether the available evidence met the “clear and convincing” standard required to establish disciplinary liability. The second focused on establishing the factual circumstances through witness testimony, which proved decisive given the nature of the case.
With the territory in question remaining under occupation, the evidentiary record was necessarily limited and relied primarily on witness accounts. During the hearing, those witnesses confirmed that the judge had upheld his oath and adhered to applicable ethical standards, refused any cooperation with occupying authorities, and actively supported the local community. They also confirmed that he had been subjected to detention, violence, and coercion during the occupation.
Case Impact
The matter presented challenges across several dimensions: legal uncertainty in assessing conduct under occupation, a constrained evidentiary framework, and the severity of the potential sanction. The outcome demonstrates that a carefully structured defence and a well-developed evidentiary strategy can secure a fair hearing even in highly sensitive disciplinary proceedings.
The client was represented by Anastasiia Didenko, Counsel and Head of the Anti-Corruption & Compliance Practice, and Mykhailo Protsailo, Senior Associate, Criminal Law Practice.
Other news
