Lamakh is no longer the president of the Union of Advocates of Ukraine.
Taras Lamakh, President of the Union of Advocates of Ukraine (the oldest professional public association of lawyers), announced the termination of his tenure at the union, which he ultimately called a "garbage, toxic organization." Why did this happen? ZiB.
Taras Lamakh and his Eleven Friends
"Dear colleagues and friends! This is my final statement regarding the Ukrainian Bar Association. Unfortunately, the Ukrainian Bar Association has become a toxic, mercenary organization. Its offices were searched and raided, as they were located on premises owned by Viktor Medvedchuk. Viktor Medvedchuk is and will forever remain the sole founder in the association's statutory documents, and therefore, in accordance with the decision of the National Security and Defense Council, the UBA's accounts have been frozen. Board members Vitaliy Serdyuk, Taras Gerelyuk, Oleksandr Drozdov, and myself have decided to resign." wrote T.Lamakh.
He also announced the termination of the powers of Vadim Krasnik as vice president and his wife, executive director Tatyana Krasnik, "for the duration of the investigation into allegations of crimes committed by these individuals." The relevant statements, received Previously, the former head of the Kyiv City Council of Advocates, Petro Ryabenko, and lawyer Vadim Khabibullin, were sent to law enforcement agencies.
"Accordingly, the SAU board lacks a quorum, and its activities have effectively ceased. However, until the SAU congress is held, if it is even possible to convene one, I am transferring the powers of the SAU president to Vice President Alexei Fozekosh (Fazekosh is his correct surname – editor's note) (with his consent)," the former president added.
As a reminder, the organization's charter requires more than half of the directors to constitute a quorum. A year ago, there were eleven. In addition to those mentioned above, lawyers Pavel Grechkovsky, Sergei Udovichenko, Olga Zhukovskaya, Galina Rudenko, and Radmila Grevtsova (the latter had also previously announced her resignation) were elected vice presidents.
According to the former director, since five directors resigned, and one was removed during the last meeting, it was a priori impossible to reach a quorum within the organization. This logic explains the doubts about holding the SAU congress, and the decision to delegate authority seems like a final joke.
Mistrust for inaction
However, the situation appears somewhat different if we look at the events leading up to the high-profile announcement. On September 2, a Union meeting was held to consider the petition of four vice presidents (G. Rudenko, V. Krasnik, S. Udovichenko, and A. Zhukovskaya), who accused their leader of inaction during his year in office and expressed no confidence in him.
"During this period, President Taras Lamakh did absolutely nothing significant. Moreover, with the onset of a full-scale war, he withdrew from his presidential duties and completely paralyzed the activities of the UAU," the statement read. "Furthermore, due to the UAU president's personal stance on the full-scale military invasion by the Russian Federation, the UAU has not made a single public statement regarding its stance on the aggressive war unleashed against Ukraine. This is despite the fact that corresponding appeals, harshly and uncompromisingly condemning the inhumane war against our homeland, were proactively prepared by the UAU vice presidents at the beginning of the war, discussed, and approved by the majority of the board. However, for unclear and unacceptable reasons, the UAU president blocked their adoption and engaged in bullying against the initiators—the authors of the appeals who supported them, and the board members."
T. Lamakh was also accused of introducing a property qualification for decision-making: “Any initiatives by the vice-presidents of the SAU or members of the SAU to organize the Union’s activities under martial law were perceived by the president of the SAU, T.B. Lamakh, as a personal challenge and were subjected to harsh and offensive criticism, with unacceptable hints that voting rights in the organization could only belong to wealthy people.”
In the interests of the members of the UAU, and to protect the reputation and authority of the oldest legal organization in Ukraine, the vice presidents of the UAU expressed absolute distrust of the current president, seeing in his actions "harmful inaction, incompetence, and unprofessionalism, as well as an unwillingness to listen to the opinions of UAU members. This clearly threatens the interests of the UAU itself and undermines its authority and the authority of its members in the legal community and in Ukraine as a whole."
Taras Lamakh. Fake suspension
However, at the meeting, which was supposed to be held online, formal irregularities in its organization prevented even the agenda from being approved. Therefore, the decision that served as the basis for convening the meeting (a vote of no confidence in the president) was not even considered.
The president, however, attempted to strike back at the "rebels" by bringing up statements by lawyers P. Ryabenko and V. Khabibullin regarding V. Krasnik's "crimes" for discussion. It's unclear what authority the public organization has over this matter, but the discussion began nonetheless. Moreover, at least two of the four vice presidents who signed the statement, according to them, were excluded from the conference entirely during the discussion and vote. Therefore, the question was effectively voted on without a quorum—by four of the nine participants.
Under these circumstances, the legitimacy of the meeting and the appropriateness of the personnel decisions made there cannot be argued. The decision to forward the criminal complaint prepared by lawyers against lawyers to law enforcement agencies is also surprising from an ethical standpoint. After all, according to the practice of applying the Rules of Lawyer Ethics, disciplinary bodies take a negative view of colleagues' cooperation with the investigation and the prosecution.
V. Krasnik himself notes, that there are currently six vice presidents. He is confident that a quorum exists for decision-making. He announced another meeting, which the SAU will convene soon. It will consider the same motion of no confidence and the state of affairs within the organization, and determine which vice president will assume the duties of the SAU president.
translation Skelet.Org
DOSSIER: Viktor Medvedchuk: Putin's crony guarding Russia's interests in Ukraine
Lustration of lawyers: lawyers want to kill their “brother” colleagues
"Vovkas" and "Lions" in Sheep's Clothing: Why Judicial System Reform Is Slowing Down
Subscribe to our channels in Telegram, Facebook, Twitter, VC — Only new faces from the section CRYPT!