Criminal cases against Yulia Tymoshenko since 2010

The European Union (EU) and EU member states, along with the United States, Russia and Canada (as well as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch) expressed concern that the allegations against Tymoshenko did not constitute crimes and that the charges were politically motivated. The United Kingdom and the United States have stated that this phrasing also applies to the prosecution of dozens other former ministers and officials, including former Ukrainian minister Bohdan Danylyshyn, who was granted political asylum in the Czech Republic in January 2011 "because his prosecution may be politically motivated".[34]

In 2012-2013, government and non-governmental organizations in Europe and the United States more clearly indicated the presence of political prisoners in Ukraine. On May 23, 2012, the European Parliament issued a resolution that, for the first time, explicitly referenced "political prisoners in Ukraine".[51][52] . Tymoshenko and her colleagues were described as "political prisoners" in the report, which was adopted at the June session of the PACE (2013) :

• "4.1.6. Conclusion: Yulia Tymoshenko as a presumed political prisoner under Assembly Resolution 1900 (2012).

71. The analysis of key issues as presented above, in light of the criteria for the definition of political prisoners in Resolution 1900 (2012), leads to a fairly compelling result, namely that Ms Tymoshenko must be recognised as a presumed political prisoner:

1) Ms Tymoshenko is a key opposition leader and main rival of the current President. She was sentenced to a particularly harsh seven-year prison term on the basis of vague abuse-of-office charges.

2) These charges effectively criminalised the political decision she had taken as Prime Minister in favour of an agreement with Russia to end an acute crisis threatening the provision of gas to Ukraine and other European countries.

3) The prosecution and trial were marred by numerous presumptive procedural violations.

4) Ms Tymoshenko was also put under intense physical and psychological pressure, both during pretrial detention and in post-conviction custody. Her family, lawyers and political allies, in particular Mr Vlasenko, have also suffered from a co-ordinated campaign of harassment and persecution by the authorities.

5) The legally and factually dubious nature of the new charges brought against her further underpins their political motivation"[53][54]

Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and the Party of Regions came to power in February 2010 following the Ukrainian presidential elections of 2010,[55] where Tymoshenko lost to Yanukovych after gaining 45.5% of the votes in the second and final round.[56][57][58]). Yanukovych and his allies have been accused of trying to create a "controlled democracy" in Ukraine, and of trying to "destroy" the main opposition party BYuT (BYuT was dissolved in December 2012, but the core party of the alliance "Fatherland" remained a major force in Ukrainian politics (Tymoshenko was the leader of this party[59]))[60][61] . Both have denied these charges.[62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72] Criminal cases were opened, in the spring of 2010, against a dozen former officials from the second Tymoshenko Government, who were also given prison terms).[73][74][75][76] Some observers speculated that these trials were part of what they described as President Viktor Yanukovych’s crackdown on his political opponents.[77][78][79] Other former top officials who served with this cabinet and other members of Tymoshenko's "Fatherland" (party) were also arrested on "abuse of power" charges in the period following February 2010.[80][81][82][83] The opposition against Yanukovych again dismissed these arrests as "political persecution".[81] Yanukovych has stated these arrests should be seen as only "a serious battle against corruption".[82] In a press conference on 12 May 2010, President Yanukovych's representative in the Verkhovna Rada, Yury Miroshnychenko, stated that Yanukovych was against political repression for criticism of the regime.[84] President According to Yanukovych (on 4 February 2011) "many lies told and attempts made to misinform the international community and ordinary people in Ukraine about the true state of affairs in the country". He also stated that "a crushing blow delivered under his rule to corruption and bureaucracy has been met with resistance".[48] In February 2012, however, Yanukovych stated that the trial of Tymoshenko and other former officials "didn't meet European standards and principles".[85]

Tymoshenko herself filed lawsuit in courts outside Ukraine, demanding that Prime Minister Mykola Azarov be banned from making statements about her alleged involvement in the crimes of former Prime Minister Pavlo Lazarenko.[86]

In June 2004 (it was the beginning of the presidential elections in Ukraine) Tymoshenko was accused that she was going to bribe the judges of the Supreme Court in 2003 (exactly "was going to bribe", because there was no attempt to "transfer bribes") with the aim to release from jail her father-in-law Hennady Tymoshenko and Antonina Bolyura (both worked for United Energy Systems of Ukraine).[88][90]

The essence of the criminal case: in June 2004, Ukrainian TV showed a video material — Yu. Tymoshenko (and her bodyguard) were shown in the office of some lawyer (it was he who made the recording) who had promised to procure in re-hearing Tymoshenko's father-in-law's lawsuit. Tymoshenko hurried up the lawyer and was disturbed with his resultless efforts despite money given to him. It is important to emphasize that Hennadi Tymoshenko in prison suffered a microinsult. Just based on that video recording, a criminal suit was initiated against Tymoshenko under the articles 15 part 2 and 369 part 1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. But this criminal case was closed in 2004, under Kuchma presidency.[91]

A 2004 criminal case against Tymoshenko on accusations she had planned to bribe Supreme Court judges in 2003 — was reopened 12 May 2010.[4][5] However, on this criminal case no message almost since its opening in 2010. This criminal case fell apart again.

It should also be said that Hennady Tymoshenko died May 24, 2012, aged 75 years. Yulia Tymoshenko at the time was in prison, she was not given permission to attend the funeral of the man, whom she called "father".

On 5 May 2010 Azarov's Cabinet of Ministers made a decision to attract the firm Trout Cacheris PLLC (Washington) to audit Timoshenko's office activities in 2007–2010 years (two more firms, Akim Gump and an Investigation Agency Kroll Inc., were hired as subcontractors). More than 10 mln US dollars were planned to pay for auditing.[92]

On 15 October 2010 (after abolition of the Ukrainian Constitution on October, the 1st and before the beginning of the regional elections on October, the 31st), Azarov government (namely, Auditing Department of Financial Ministry) completed auditing Tymoshenko's second government activities. The two US firms were involved in auditing – Trout Cacheris PLLC and Akim Gump (it could be seen indicative that the US Embassy in Ukraine set themselves apart from those firms). Upon completion of the auditing, the Auditing Department of the Ukrainian Ministry of Finance declared 43 bln grn (that is $5 billion) "misuse" of state money. However, а month later this amount was 15 times reduced and the money appeared not to be "stolen" but transferred to the Ukrainian Pension Fund. Actually, it was the money (320 mln euros) received from selling to Japan a "greenhouse gas emanation quota".[93] Such a transaction was quite a new for Ukraine, and Tymoshenko government were proud to implement it, the more so that it was done at the time of the "world global crisis 2008-2009".

Tymoshenko was charged with, principally, two violations, on which basis the two criminal cases were opened:

1) On 2 December 2010 Yulia Tymoshenko was first called to the Procurator's Office of Ukraine as for the "Kyoto money" case. Tymoshenko was accused of transferring 320 mln euros, the money which had been received from selling Japan a "greenhouse gas emanation quota" to the Ukrainian Pension Fund (in 2009 year of global crisis) instead of spending it for planting forests (as required by Kyoto Protocol). On the 30th of December (on the very eve of the New Year celebration) she was under interrogation during 12 hours in a row (from 12 a.m. to 12 p.m.).

On 16 December 2010 Ukrainian law enforcers started a criminal case against Tymoshenko for illegal use of funds - the money (that Ukraine received for selling their quotas under the Kyoto Protocol) was transferred to the Pension Fund of Ukraine, and used for the payment of pensions to the population of Ukraine.[94]

2) On 27 January 2011 the case on purchasing, in 2009, a thousand of Opel Combo ambulances for the needs of rural medicine was initiated (Tymoshenko was incriminated spending funds in a way that was not envisaged in the 2009 state budget). The cars were supplied from Austria on credit terms (with payment in 2010) at the price of 12.5 thousand euros (the price did not exceed that on the market). Tymoshenko was charged under the article 365, p. 3, the article 364, p. 2, the article 210, p. 2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (that is, exceeding official authorities; infringement of Budget Law; abuse of office charges, that led to badly unfavourable consequences).[95]

In all those cases, procurators do not blame Yu. V. Tymoshenko either in stealing the funds, or in doing the damage, the basis of charges being money misuse.[96]

On 15 December 2010 the General Procurator's Office imposed on Tymoshenko "travel restrictions" as a preventive measure. Yet Tymoshenko managed to leave Ukraine for Brussels where she was present (on March, 24-26, 2011) at the summit of the European People's Party at the personal invitations of its leader Wilfried Martens and the US senator John McCain. Tymoshenko had meetings with the European leading politicians like German Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Sarkozy.

On 17 June 2011 in Washington there was a press-conference (see YouTube[97]) of an authoritative American law firm "Covington & Burling" and a large auditing company "BDO USA" (having branch offices in more than 100 countries round the world) to which Yulia Tymoshenko and her party "Batkivshchyna" applied with the request to evaluate how justified were the charges incriminated to her, as well as to scrutinize the validity of the report ordered by the Azarov government and made by the American law firms "Trout Cacheris" and "Akin Gump" (their report was submitted on October, the 14th, 2010 and was used as a basis for initiating further charges against Yulia Tymoshenko).[98]

At the above-mentioned conference, the lawyers concluded that:

• "The paragraphs on "Kyoto money" and "Opel Combo ambulances" do not worth the paper on which they were printed... As for the current moment, the charges against the former Prime Minister (Tymoshenko) seem to be political by their origin, so as there are not any facts to substantiate them... Conclusions: The facts revealed by us give ground for secure defending from those charges either in a Ukrainian court or in some international court in case if a justified hearing is not possible within Ukraine"[99]
• "A limited number of documents which have been analyzed by us, show that the agreement between the Austrian firm Vamed and Ukrmedpostach was signed without any mediators. The price for an Opel ambulance did not exceed that on a market’,- state Covington and Burling.[98][99]

Following this press-conference, the above said cases of Kyoto money and ambulances for rural medicine were suspended by Ukrainian state procurators.

The total assessment of the whole set of criminal cases was given by David Kramer(executive director of Freedom House) at the conference "The Future of Ukraine: Defiance and Consequences of Administrative Actions" (held on July, 7th, 2011 in Washington) and organized by the Peterson Institution of International Economics, The USA and Europe Centre of the Brookings Institution, The Atlantic Council):

• "Those investigations can not be trusted any more. These are a chain of convictions against Yulia Tymoshenko following one after another until some of them might “shoot”... I'm applying to my colleagues from the Ukrainian government who are present in here. When you are back home and report before the members of your office, tell them to put an end to these. These are shameful!"[100][101][102]

On June, the 24th, 2011, the Ukrainian General Prosecutor’s Office delivered Yu. Tymoshenko the "Ruling for suing her on charges in compliance with the gas case-2009 (p.3 Article 365 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine – power abusing, or exceeding of office authorities resulted in ill effects", which envisages 7 to 10 years of imprisonment):

• "Prime Minister of Ukraine Tymoshenko Yu. V., acting purposefully and in personal interests, being aware of groundless and baseless requirements from the Russian part during the talks held in presence of her and the leadership of the government of the Russian Federation, the joint stock company Gazprom, and the national joint stock company Naftogaz Ukrainy … made a decision to adopt the a.m. unfavourable for Ukraine conditions" (from the Ruling of the General Procurator's Office of Ukraine to sue Tymoshenko as accused, p. 5, 24 Jun 2011.)[103]

At the June session of PACE (2013) approved a report that focuses on the gas case of Timoshenko:

• "47. Ms Tymoshenko was sentenced to a seven-year prison term on the basis of vague abuse-of-office “Excess of authority” – Article 365 of the Ukrainian Criminal Code... 48. The criminal charge against the former Prime Minister was that the deal struck between her and Russian Prime Minister Putin was financially disadvantageous to Ukraine and that it had not been approved in writing beforehand by her cabinet. The political deal between the two prime ministers... was reached in a climate of severe crisis, after Mr Putin had ordered that gas supplies to Ukraine and through Ukraine to western Europe be cut on 5 January 2009. See The Economist of 8 January 2009 : ...“some countries felt the effect immediately, in bitterly cold weather. Hungary, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Romania were hit hard, but the gas freeze also affects Germany, France and Italy...” On 17 January 2009, Ms Tymoshenko, who was under intense pressure from the European Union and key western European leaders to unblock the situation, reached an agreement of principle with Mr Putin, in Moscow. On 19 January, Naftogaz and Gazprom signed the contract... After Ms Tymoshenko's return, on 21 January, the cabinet confirmed the contracts, and on 22 January, the flow of Russian gas to Ukraine and to western Europe was fully restored... Astonishingly, the fact that the cabinet approved the deal two days later is not even mentioned in the judgment" (PACE, Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights. Rapporteur : Mr Pieter OMTZIGT (Netherlands, EPP/CD). "Keeping political and criminal responsibility separate" (Doc. 13214). 28 May 2013.)[53]

And later in this report said that Tymoshenko could be considered a political prisoner :

• "71. The analysis of key issues as presented above, in light of the criteria for the definition of political prisoners in Resolution 1900 (2012), leads to a fairly compelling result, namely that Ms Tymoshenko must be recognised as a presumed political prisoner" (PACE. "Keeping political and criminal responsibility separate" (Doc. 13214). 28 May 2013.)[53]

Witnesses in the "gas case" were dozens of ex-ministers and known politicians.

As for the 26th of July 2011, it was planned to interrogate 38 witnesses for "the part of prosecution". The judge Kireyev gave admission to witness, for the Tymoshenko part, to just two people (out of 33 claimed) - Alexander Turchinov and Michail Lyvinsky. However even "witnesses for the prosecution part" were testifying, mainly, in favour of Tymoshenko. As a result, Tymoshenko wrote in her Twitter: "Kireyev was banned to call “our” witnesses, he got rebuked even for “theirs” (i.e. witnesses from prosecution)". On July, the 26th, 2011, i.e. just as soon as the process of witnessing started, direct teletransmitting from the trial room stopped.

The important moment in witnessing by Oleg Dubina (a former Head of Naftogaz) was his proving that "The Gas Agreement of 19.01.2009 was made on provisions that Ukraine could at any moment terminate it without whatever "penalty sanctions from the part of Russia".

• To the Tymoshenko's question whether Ukraine is enabled to cancel the agreement at any moment without whatever penalties, Dubina replied positively : "The agreement foresees penalty sanctions for underutilizing gas, but as for the Agreement itself, I can’t tell you for sure, but, I believe, it may be so".[104]

Oleg Dubina confirmed that the agreement with Russia was set the standard formula - the price of gas is calculated according to the price of oil.

It is worth mentioning that at the trial against Tymoshenko almost all the witnesses (Oleg Dubina, Alexander Turchinov in particular) said that it was President Yushchenko himself who had ruined the price of US$235 per a thousand m³ of gas agreed by Tymoshenko Cabinet for 2009 year; he had recalled Mr. Dubyna, a Head of Naftogaz, from Moscow (though Yushchenko was not authorized to do that). On the day of Yushchenko witnessing (17.08.2011), Russian mass media sources published the commentary of "a representative from the Kremlin", who said :

• "Yushchenko is lying to the trial… in telephone conversations with Medvedev, Yushchenko assured that he fully trusted Yulia Tymoshenko and that she was given the whole scope of necessary authorities and he was in support of the agreements concluded with Russia".[106]

The "Koretzky Institution of State and Law" is an expert organization in Ukraine; the General Procurator's Office of Ukraine involved the Institution specialists as experts yet at the investigation stage of the gas case.

On the 15th of August, 2011, Deputy Director of the Institution Vladimir Nagrebelny presented to the trial an expert conclusion according to which Tymoshenko did not exceed her office authorities in the course of gas talks with Russia:

• "By her gas directives, ex-P.M. Yulia Tymoshenko did not exceed her authorities";[107]
• The Institution of State and Law takes the gas directives by Yulia Tymoshenko as "the means necessary for implementation of her duties".[108]

Tymoshenko's trial (she was charged in May 2011) over abuse of office over a natural gas imports contract signed with Russia in January 2009 started on 24 June 2011 in Kyiv.[109][110] In October 2011 Party of Regions' parliamentary faction leader Oleksandr Yefremov stated that this criminal case against Tymoshenko was initiated by the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine in February 2009 at the initiative of (then) Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko.[111] (A former ally of Tymoshenko[112]) Yushchenko testified against Tymoshenko during the trial; a trial he called "a normal judicial process".[113]

On 5 August 2011 Tymoshenko was arrested for "ridiculing court proceedings" during this trail.[23] At the time Tymoshenko was being held at Lukyanivska Prison.[24] There Tymoshenko (her defence claimed) suffered bruises on the skin and she contracted pneumonia, later followed by back pain.[114] According to Ombudsman Nina Karpachova, Tymoshenko demands that independent doctors took her blood test.[24]

On 11 October 2011, the court found Tymoshenko guilty of abuse of power, sentenced her to seven years in jail, and ordered her to pay the state $188 million.[22][115][116] She was convicted for exceeding her powers as Prime Minister, by ordering Naftogaz to sign the gas deal with Russia in 2009.[116] On 11 October 2011 a record number of special units of the Ukrainian militsiya (police) were in Kyiv (The Ministry of Police claimed in a statement about 4,500)[117] Several tens of thousands of demonstrators came to Kyiv to support Tymoshenko.[22][118]

Tymoshenko did appeal against the sentence on 24 October 2011;[119] which she compared to Stalin's Great Terror.[22][116][120]

President Yanukovych and other Government officials have hinted that the law that convicted Tymoshenko could be changed in her benefit.[121][122][123][124] According to opposition politicians, this could have been done as soon as one week after Tymoshenko's conviction.[125][126] However, after postponing the vote twice,[127][128][129] the Parliament of Ukraine voted against decriminalizing abuse of office on 15 November 2011.[130]

Tymoshenko lost her appeal against her sentence of abuse of power of 11 October 2011 on 23 December 2011.[131][132] She and her lawyers had boycotted the appeal proceedings[131] claiming "Judicial system and justice are totally non-existent in Ukraine today".[133] Tymoshenko has lodged a complaint against the verdict at the European Court of Human Rights, which was given priority treatment by the court.[134]

On 30 December 2011 Tymoshenko was transferred to the Kachanivska penal colony in Kharkiv.[25]

The Parliament of Ukraine again voted against decriminalizing the law under which Tymoshenko was sentenced to imprisonment on 8 February 2012.[135]

On 14 June 2012 Kostyantyn Hryshchenko, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, gave an interview to the national newspaper of Italy Corriere della Sera (Milan) where he said that back in 2009 Tymoshenko violated a law that was in force at that time, giving a permission to sign a gas agreement that was very disadvantageous to Ukraine on the petition of German and other European governments.[136][137]

On January 26, 2012, Yulia Tymoshenko's defense submitted a cassation appeal to the High Specialized Court for Civil and Criminal Cases regarding the “gas case” verdict.[138] On August 16, 2012, after a 7-month delay that impeded filing the case to the European Court of Human Rights, the panel of judges of the aforementioned court began hearing the case. The panel finished hearing the case on August 21 and went to the jury room to make decision. The ruling of the Court, issued on August 29, 2012, stated that the appeal of ex prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko's defense on the "gas case" should not be satisfied.[139]

Media, diplomats, members of parliament and members of an EU special monitoring mission, Pat Cox and Aleksander Kwasniewski, attended the court sessions. The ruling was announced on the day following public hearing of "Tymoshenko vs Ukraine" (regarding unlawful arrest of ex-prime minister and holding her in custody) case at the European Court of Human Rights.

On 6 September 2013 the High Specialized Court for Civil and Criminal Cases denied the petition made by Tymoshenko's lawyers to allow extraordinary appeal to the Supreme Court of Ukraine.[140] On the 6 October 2013 another petition was dismissed as "lodged on the same ground as previously denied petition".[141]

After the Ukrainian revolution of November 2013-February 2014 the High Specialized Court for Civil and Criminal Cases grant the petition that was made by Yulia Tymoshenko herself and send the case to the Supreme Court of Ukraine. On 14 April 2014 Ukrainian Supreme Court sitting en banc reversed the conviction of Yulia Tymoshenko and closed the case against her on the ground that "no crime was committed".[142]

A 2001 criminal case on state funds embezzlement and tax evasion charges against Tymoshenko was reopened in Ukraine on 24 October 2011.[17]

On 4 November 2011 the Ukrainian tax police resumed four criminal cases against Tymoshenko.[16] She was charged for these cases on 10 November 2011.[16]

Tymoshenko was re-arrested (while in prison) on 8 December 2011, after a Ukrainian court ordered her indefinite arrest, as part of the investigation of alleged tax evasion and theft of government funds in 1996-1997 by United Energy Systems of Ukraine; again the European Union showed concern over this.[147][148][149][150][151]

Rodion Kireyev, the judge who had sentenced Tymoshenko to seven years in jail (on 11 October 2011) was charged for "giving a deliberately unlawful verdict" on 20 June 2014.[215] Kireyev disappeared from Kyiv on 2 July 2014 and was placed on the wanted list on 7 July 2014.[215] He was dismissed from his office by President Petro Poroshenko on 18 January 2016.[216]

• "Tymoshenko's ordeal". Euronews. August 5, 2011.
• Company Covington & Burling LLP and BDO concluded that the charges against Tymoshenko are politically motivated. June 17, 2011.