The refusal by the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) to admit journalists to a hearing on 6 November violates the principle of open court proceedings. Even if the courtroom had a limited number of seats, the court should have given reporters priority access, believes Institute of Mass Information (IMI) lawyer Petro Stoinov.
He said that the openness of court proceedings is enshrined in Article 27 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine and Article 11 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges”.
The lawyer explained that, unlike motions for searches, where proceedings in camera are justified by the secrecy of the investigation and the risk of evidence being destroyed, hearings to choose a measure of restraint for a suspect are, as a general rule, public.
“Proper practical application of the publicity principle requires first admitting the audience (including reporters) to the courtroom, and only after the hearing begins can the investigating judge (on the motion of the parties and after discussion) issue a reasoned ruling to switch to a private session,” Stoinov remarked.
He stressed that, since the judge had not ruled that the hearing would be held in camera, denying entry to the courtroom while the judge was in the deliberation room was unlawful.
The lawyer also commented on the claims that there were not enough seats in the courtroom, saying that this did not justify completely denying journalists entry.
Stoinov recalled that Part 1 of Article 328 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine only allows restricting access to the courtroom where there is a genuine seat shortage. At the same time, the law grants journalists priority right to attend court hearings.
“That is, even in a small room, the court and security should have admitted as many journalists as the number of available seats, confirmed by a SAPO prosecutor, allowed,” Stoinov remarked.
The IMI lawyer also criticised the decision to move the hearing to another courtroom without notifying journalists.
In his view, the decision violated the media’s right of access to information about where a case would be heard and ran counter to the HACC’s Communication Strategy, which defines openness as one of the court’s core operating principles.
On 6 November, journalists were denied access to a High Anti-Corruption Court hearing choosing a measure of restraint for Serhiy Duka, SBU’s former first deputy chief of National Statehood Protection who is a suspect in the “Carthage case”.