Ukrainian World Congress President Attends Court Hearing of Ukraine’s Former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko

Aug 25th, 2011 | By | Category: Political Persecutions, Ukraine, Ukrainians Worldwide

On August 18, 2011, Ukrainian World Congress (UWC) President Eugene Czolij, together with the President of the European Congress of Ukrainians, Jaroszlava Hartyani, attended the court hearing of Ukraine’s former Prime Minister, Yulia Tymoshenko, at the Pecherskiy District Court in Kyiv.

During a recess in the hearings Eugene Czolij had a five-minute meeting with Yulia Tymoshenko when she expressed gratitude for the reaction of UWC and Ukrainians worldwide on her arrest.  Eugene Czolij assured her that the UWC would continue to monitor the court proceedings and work to ensure that Ukraine respects human rights in accordance with Ukraine’s laws and its international obligations.

The UWC President spoke to the media on the issue condemning the unjustified arrest of the former Prime Minister.  View the video:



Ukrainian World Congress

145 Evans Ave., #207
Toronto, ON
M8X 5X8 Canada

Tel. (416) 323-3020
Fax (416) 323-3250


Tags: ,

One Comment to “Ukrainian World Congress President Attends Court Hearing of Ukraine’s Former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko”

  1. mirko says:

    Regarding my colleague’s comment “condemning the unjustified arrest of the former Prime Minister” :

    Ms. Tymoshenko was arrested for contempt of court. As was clearly demonstrated in the video clip of the court procedings rel="nofollow"> , Ms. Tymoshenko was disrespectful of the court and the judge, actually saying that neither deserved or had earned respect. The veracity of that claim is not a defense against the fact of this disrespect. The courtesies of the court process were explained to her by the judge more than once, before the judge found her in contempt.
    Regarding this practice in other countries, I need only quote from Wikipedia regarding the practice in Canada, with which my colleage must be familiar.

    Criminal offences are found within the Criminal Code of Canada or other federal/provincial laws, with the exception that contempt of court is the only remaining common law offence in Canada.[2]
    Contempt of Court includes the following behaviours:
    § Fails to maintain a respectful attitude, remain silent or refrain from showing approval or disapproval of the proceeding
    § Refuses or neglects to obey a subpoena
    § Willfully disobeys a process or order of the Court
    § Interfere with the orderly administration of justice or to impair the authority or dignity of the Court
    § Officer of the Court fails to perform his or her duties
    § Sheriff and/or bailiff does not execute a writ forthwith or does not make a return thereof
    [edit]Federal Courts in Canada
    This section applies only to Federal Court of Appeal and Federal Court.
    Under Federal Court Rules, section 472, a person who is accused of Contempt needs to be first served with a contempt order and then appear in court to answer the charges. Convictions can only be made when proof beyond a reasonable doubt is achieved.[3]
    If it’s a matter of urgency or the contempt was done in front of a judge, that person can be punished immediately. Punishment can range from the person being imprisoned for a period of less than five years or until the person complies with the order or fine. < The contempt occurred before a judge, and the punishment was immediate, and has so far consisted of a jail term of less than five years, placing it fully within the parameters of Canadian law. A prejudicial attitude presuming a priori the nature of the charges to be baseless should not colour the west's evaluation of these procedings. It is becoming clear that the finding of contempt was desired by the defense in a game being played for an arena much greater than Ukraine's judiciary. I would suggest to my colleague that finding oneself standing shoulder to shoulder with Putin on a Ukrainian issue should in and of itself give pause! Lest I be misunderstood, none of my comments apply to the Lutsenko arrest (and others) for whom the principle of Habeas Corpus needed to be applied very long ago.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.