«I have nothing to explain,» said witness Bloshko, who failed to appear in court for the second time in the case against the mayor of Bashtanka, which has been ongoing for 10 years

Judge Serhii Yanchuk examines a letter sent to the court by Ihor Bloshko on 18 May. Photo: NikVesti

In the decade-long bribery case involving Bashtanka Mayor Oleksandr Berehovyi, the court has failed for the second time to question a witness. In a letter to the court, Ihor Bloshko stated that he does not consider himself a witness in these proceedings and has nothing to explain.

This was reported by a correspondent for NikVesti.

As a reminder, this concerns a case from 2016, when law enforcement officers detained the then-deputy of the district council, and now mayor of Bashtanka, on suspicion of accepting a bribe. The Economic Protection Department of the National Police of Ukraine stated at the time that Oleksandr Berehovyi had demanded 5,000 hryvnias from a businessman in exchange for not obstructing his business activities, specifically the sanitary clearing of forest belts.

Ihor Bloshko was due to be questioned at the hearing on 6 May, but he did not appear. He had been summoned as a witness by lawyer Volodymyr Tymoshyn. Ahead of the hearing on 18 May, he sent a letter to the court stating that he had no information regarding the circumstances of the case.

«I am completely unaware of the circumstances surrounding Berehovyi’s commission of a criminal offence. I was neither an eyewitness to those events nor a witness to any of the circumstances. And, accordingly, I was not questioned as a witness during the pre-trial investigation. I have nothing to explain regarding the proceedings,» Judge Serhii Yanchuk read out the letter.

Oleksandr Beregovyi joined the court hearing via video conference as he was on a business trip in Ivano-Frankivsk. Photo: NikVesti

In his letter, Bloshko also explained that he was unable to attend the previous hearing due to medical treatment. According to him, he was on sick leave from 16 April to 8 May, and attributed his current absence to a scheduled medical examination.

«I sent a letter to the court’s email address explaining that I was unable to attend, but later realised that the letter had not reached the court due to a mistake I had made in the email address. On 18 May, I went on leave and had planned to travel abroad that day, partly to consult with hospitals overseas. However, I was forced to postpone my departure due to the need to see a doctor at the Emergency Medical Centre. I have been scheduled for a gastroscopy on 19 May at 10:00,» he said.

Furthermore, he admitted that he would be unable to attend the court hearing in the near future.

«I’m not sure I’ll be able to attend court in the near future. While my potential trip abroad remains unconfirmed, I would also like to inform you that in 2022, the Medical and Social Expertise Commission (MSEC) classified me as having a second-degree disability, as a result of which I was discharged from the Armed Forces of Ukraine. I am currently experiencing certain health complications and require treatment,» Ihor Bloshko noted in his letter.

Oleksandr Berehovyi’s lawyer, Volodymyr Tymoshyn. Photo: NikVesti

Following this, Judge Serhii Yanchuk asked the parties what they thought of the witness’s statement. To which defence lawyer Volodymyr Tymoshyn replied that he was requesting the witness be summoned again.

«If there were no valid reason, I would have filed a motion to have him brought in, but there is a valid reason,» said Volodymyr Tymoshyn.

«The witness writes that he intends to travel abroad for medical treatment in the near future,» replied the judge.

«Well, let’s set the date for a month’s time,» added the defence lawyer.

However, prosecutor Roman Tuzov expressed the view that the case could be heard without questioning the witness.

«It appears from the statement that the person in question was not an eyewitness to the criminal offence and does not possess information relevant to establishing the circumstances. I consider it possible to continue the hearing without questioning,» said Roman Tuzov.

Roman Tuzov, prosecutor at the Mykolaiv District Prosecutor’s Office. Photo: NikVesti

However, the defence objected. Volodymyr Tymoshyn pointed out that during one of the hearings, a correspondent from a local newspaper had been questioned, who had referred to Ihor Bloshko’s expertise regarding the Berehovyi case. In these articles, Bloshko commented on the progress of the investigation and mentioned the documentation of the case.

«Bloshko describes everything here: his voluntary work, how the documentation was carried out, how Hladkyi did not hide from the police, and how, on Berehovyi’s initiative, several criminal cases were opened against Hladkyi regarding illegal logging,» said the defence lawyer.

In the end, the court decided to summon Ihor Bloshko after all to examine his publications.

Support those who keep the city informed every day

Club NikVesti — a place where the reader and the editorial team are on the same side.

Members have access to a private chat, an exclusive newsletter with behind-the-scenes stories from journalists, see the news earlier, and influence the changes.

Join us. Together we keep the city bright

One-time support Monthly

€ 1 € 2 € 10

Donate

by phone

---

by card

€ 2

by phone

---

by card

€ 5

by phone

---

by card

€ 10

by phone

---

by card

Secure payment

The recipient of donations is the NGO “Mykolaiv Media Hub” (EDRPOU 45160758). By making a donation, you confirm that the amount is non-refundable and may be used by the NGO to implement its statutory activities, including supporting independent journalism and creating socially significant content. Public offer.

In addition, Volodymyr Tymoshyn raised the issue of possible procedural violations during the pre-trial investigation and asked the court to grant access to the full information from the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations.

He says that after reviewing the case materials, he found inconsistencies regarding the entry of information into the Unified Register, the start of the investigation, and changes to the classification of the criminal proceedings.

According to the lawyer, the case materials lack extracts from the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations that would confirm the date and time of the entry of information regarding the criminal offence, as well as documents concerning the transfer of proceedings between law enforcement agencies and the determination of jurisdiction.

According to the lawyer, proceedings were opened in 2016 under the article on obtaining unlawful benefits, and the investigation was conducted by the Central Police Department of the Mykolaiv region. However, the charge was subsequently changed to another article of the Criminal Code, and the proceedings began to be investigated in Bashtanka. At the same time, as the defence claims, the case file lacks documents explaining these changes. In this regard, the lawyer asked the court to grant access to the full information regarding these criminal proceedings, which is contained in the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations.

The court granted prosecutor Roman Tuzov time to review the motion and adjourned its consideration until the next hearing on 2 June.

It should be noted that the mayor of Bashtanka, Oleksandr Berehovyi, who is suspected of embezzling public funds, has returned to work after a four-month suspension.