To the Prosecutor General of Ukraine
Prosecutor of Odessa region
Directorate of the Security Service of Ukraine in the Kherson region
NGO "Lawfulness"
Заява
about committing mischief
Unjustly praised by the Odessa Administrative Court of Appeal on September 28, 2015, the fate was unconditionally secured administrative duties from the authorities for the individual to the Directorate of the Security Service of Ukraine in Kherson region about the implementation of the order “On access to the sovereign prison” (right No. 821/2190/15-a).
The head of the victims was judged by Marat Petrovich Koval.
The decision of the judge M.P. Koval was declared unfair. having decided in case of advancing conditions.
So, the positive person asked to stop at the authorities on the right to go in to secure an administrative call.
Delivery to station. 117 CAS of Ukraine, the court for the efforts of a positive person or with a powerful initiative can decide to praise the implementation of the steps to ensure the administrative call, since it is obvious that the damage to rights, freedoms and interests is unsafe Positive until the decision is praised in administrative law, since the protection of these rights, freedoms and interests will become impossible without the implementation of such approaches, and for their renewal it will be necessary to report significant costs and expenses, as well as obvious signs the wrongfulness of the decision, the action and the inactivity of the subject of the authorities are equally important.
Varto points out that, to the fullest extent, the security of the administrative call is “obvious and there are signs of wrongfulness of the decision, action and inactivity”, the consonant “and also” is used, and not “or”, as between the offensive arguments: “It is obvious that the protection of rights, freedoms and interests is unsafe” and “the protection of these rights, freedoms and interests will become impossible without the implementation of such approaches” and “for their renewal it will be necessary to report significant costs and expenses.”
However, to ensure the administrative appeal of the court, it is necessary to immediately present a case about “the presence of obvious signs of wrongfulness of the offended act” and one or more of the list of reasons.
In contrast to the imperative norms of the Law, Judge M.P. Koval Having stagnated, I will call without any obligation and are tossing around, whether there are obvious signs of the wrongfulness of the controversial decision. The unjust decision was made not to take revenge on any misdeeds until the actual circumstances of the assigned drive are revealed.
Tobto, judge M.P. Koval Having stagnated the security of the administrative call in the presence of obligatory duties for this department.
Subject to Part 2 of Art. 6 of the Constitution of Ukraine, the legislative bodies, the final authorities and the shipping authorities maintain their importance in the boundaries established by this Constitution and in accordance with the laws of Ukraine.
We appreciate what judge M.P. Koval having decided that the decision was made in excess of the established norms of the Law (the decision of the court) is clearly and obviously unjust.
It is strictly necessary to note that the most unfair decision does not lead to any offense in the tangential order, so that injustice can be established even within the boundaries of criminal conduct.
Due to the knowledge of the decision of the designated unjust decision.
By Decree of the President of Ukraine “On the recognition of judges” dated November 11, 2002, No. 1001/2002, Koval M.P. assigned to the judge of the Shevchenkivskyi District Court of the city of Kiev (overall legal experience of more than 16 years).
Shipping practice Koval M.P. (Unified State Register of Ships Resolution) to ensure that it is necessary to establish the circumstances and the presence of obvious signs of wrongfulness in case of high food security requirements. the oskarzhuvanogo act of the subject of the authorities is equally important (reference No. 815/1595/15, 1570/2268/2012 then). Moreover, in the most unjust praise of judge Koval M.P. having issued a resolution on the need to establish this situation and having voted on what is required, also, by the resolution of the Plenum of the High Administrative Court of Ukraine dated 6 January 2008, date No. 2.
Therefore, Judge M.P. Koval, there is a significant legal evidence at the court’s conclusion that this recognition is not only in accordance with the norms of the current legislation, but also in their clarification by the court of the cassation instance, having reliably known about those The most obvious confusion in such a method (contrary to the procedural norms of the Law) results in the most unfair decision.
Tobto, knowingly.
In order to ensure the evidence of the crimes committed by the judge, Koval M.P. warehouse of evil things,
We ask:
To destroy the criminal law of the established judge of the Odessa Administrative Court of Appeal Koval Marat Petrovich for Art. 375 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine for the ruling of the unfair decision of the Odessa Administrative Court of Appeal dated September 28, 2015 (right No. 821/2190/15-a).
September 10, 2015
Representative of the civil society organization “Legalitarianism” /S.I. Bilodid/
Subscribe to our channels in Telegram, Facebook, Twitter, VC — Only new faces from the section CRYPT!