In our country courts aren't found fault only by the lazy. Judges abuse for bias, for a manipulation laws, low level of competence etc. And for about the sizes of bribes in our vessels compose legends. Characters, like the Lvov judge Zvarycha, scandalously become famous all over the country, only add fuel to the fire.
Whether really everything is so hopeless in our vessels? Whether the truth, what they is total are struck with a bribery virus? Whether the simple person can find today the truth in the Ukrainian court? About this and many other we talked to the judge of the Central district court of Nikolaev Vladimir Aleynikov.
PUBLICITY IS CAPABLE TO PROTECT COURTS FROM "BEHIND-THE-SCENES GAMES"
- Vladimir Aleksandrovich, let's begin that is called "from an oven"... How in general become the judge?
- For a start the higher legal education is necessary. Then - length of service not less than three years at legal positions. There is a certain list of positions which are connected with legal work. It includes militia, prosecutor's office, legal profession, юристконсульты. It is possible to work in court, for example, as the assistant to the judge... There are a lot of nuances. For example, militia positions are included in this list not all: patrulno - sentry duty, GAI - don't enter, and here investigators - enter. With work in court too it is interesting: the assistant to the judge is included in this list, and the secretary of court sessions - No. Though to carry out between them a difference very and very difficult. I here began with the secretary. In principle, this list is, it opened and anything especially unclear, except any such questions, there isn't present.
- In other words, simply graduate of the law department who yesterday has got up from a student's bench, the judge can't become?
- There are also age restrictions - it is possible to become the judge from 25 years. It is stated in the legislation. But in practice of 25 years never it turns out, I, at least, didn't meet. Younger 27 years well simply don't happen. It is impossible purely technically.
- Then the bulk of judges in Ukraine age is more senior 30?
- Yes, certainly 30 years are more senior.
- And how there is primary appointment of the judge? For the first time who appoints it?
- For the first time the judge is appointed by the Decree of the President, to 5 years. Then, the judge can be appointed by the Resolution of the Verkhovna Rada is termless.
- These 5 years that, any kvalifikatsionno - a trial period?
- Well, in principle yes.
- And, what 5 years can prevent during here these?... Than the Verkhovna Rada is guided then at appointment of the judge is termless? Than deputies are guided actually I know, and here is formal? Whether there are during these 5 years any restrictions at the judge? Well, for example removal of any number of decisions which were cancelled then by appellate courts?
- Doesn't exist. Certainly, if the judge for for 5 years of work considered, suppose, 100 cases and from which courts of the highest authority cancelled 120 - because he on 20 still managed in the middle to take out definition which doesn't climb anywhere - that, probably such person won't be able to work as the judge. And all the rest... Speak about any percent, about any normal percent. As report on committees - number of "cancellations" within norm.
- In the Soviet Union judges elected. Certainly, it was formal as the choice was from one candidate. But we know that in many countries of judges choose. What do you think of selectivity of judges? In view of, what today this subject is actively discussed in the highest political circles?
- Now the normal judge is in principle the plowman. It is necessary to meet daily a large number of people, to study the mass of various documents, to run tens business etc. At the judge is a lot of a lot of technical work. Therefore to be engaged also in election campaign, in any minimum even its option - I have neither opportunity on it, nor ability. Me to it didn't teach.
- But, same time in 5 years..
- Even time in 5 years. Election campaign of the President for anybody not the secret, turns 2 years. Election campaign of the Verkhovna Rada too turns 2 years. Therefore it turns out that 2 years from 5 it is necessary to be engaged in election campaign and only 3 years to work, and in the rest of the time to people where to go while we will be engaged in elections. We have no system. Here, for example People's Deputies.It is clear that when it votes it votes as it considers it necessary, it is clear that there nobody will replace it, but the main technical work for it is performed by its device. And it has time essentially to be engaged in the image. Judges on it time generally - don't have that. Because we should listen to people, we should speak with people, we should write decisions... After all the person here came why - that and what to him a difference good business or bad. He should receive the decision and where - that with this decision to go. The decision after all should be written, and it on the average 20 minutes the page, that is they should be written once. Anybody for me won't write these decisions. I as though don't know, maybe, an old formation, but me taught - who makes the decision, that and writes it.. And therefore systemically to be engaged in image, elections, judges simply have no time.
- But in the developed countries other mechanism works also. Processes which cause the public response, are described in the most active way in mass media, and by the time of elections the majority of voters already has a certain opinion that this or that judge is - they know it on processes which it conducted and according to decisions which it made. Also there is no need to carry out any election campaign - the judge and so known figure, the majority of voters is known that it costs.
- We don't have it. Our trials, as a rule, aren't described. And even if about something also write, the identity of the judge isn't mentioned at all.
- So it is worth changing system? Personally it would be better for you if work of judges was actively shined in mass media?
Personally it would be better for me. I can explain why. Publicity on the one hand it seems as it is difficult. But on the other hand it protects from "behind-the-scenes" games. The most difficult, and in general the most important, that personally isn't pleasant to me, is "behind-the-scenes" games - they are infinite and anybody never in life will understand who is right and who isn't right. So, here publicity in itself is a certain guarantee of honesty... In principle, the normal person can say in public only that is honest. Nobody leaves on people and won't speak: "I stole", or "I killed". Anybody also will never say that contradicts morals, simply won't dare to tell it. One business to write that is called "under a table" - paper after all will endure everything - unclear as to give to people. And absolutely another - to rise and publicly it is people to say directly. Here, to rise and tell people in eyes on the black - white.Especially, knowing that it will be spread around then in mass media.
- That is, in other words it is possible to tell, what here such open public system will suit more decent judges?
- Also will arrange to a lesser extent, judges at which, so to speak, "finger in the pie" as any openness it is simple a knife in a throat?
- Certainly. Besides, if to reconstruct all system on more public harmony, from it it is possible to clean the mass of paper work. Here you look, in the same United States of America of paper work it is much less. There public process open...
- And who there "does" papers?
- It there actually isn't present. That is, well these shorthand reports are necessary to someone, them make in any order, someone prints them, then them reads, then them hems... But in the progress of the case as here we - have no protocol of a court session, so the decision needs to be cancelled...
- By the way, Vladimir Aleksandrovich and how it is correct to address to the judge? It as - that is stipulated in the legislation? The address "Your honor" seems to me a little artificial. It is very similar to an inept tracing-paper from the American cinema.
- I don't think that it is any tracing-paper... In the law it is told that when considering the case it is necessary to address to court "Your honor".
- It is so stipulated in the Ukrainian legislation?...
- Yes. In the procedural code.
THE JURY DOES CONCEPTS OF FAULT AND INNOCENCE MORE CLEAR TO PEOPLE
- Vladimir Aleksandrovich, and what do you think of a jury? In Ukraine there is no such institute, and here in other countries it functions quite successfully
- Yes, in Ukraine there is no jury institute. At all its complexity as cars (it is rather difficult) a jury generally - that bears the mass of the positive moments. Anyway we anywhere won't get to from estimated categories. The Russian classics, the Ukrainian classics (the real Ukrainian classics, instead of that which now try to give out for it) says that the person, his soul, put him and acts are extremely difficult and ambiguous. And if I established that the person such that numbers did that - that it doesn't mean yet that he is guilty. There is a mass of things which aren't subject to unambiguous treatment.And so, the jury promotes the correct assessment of proofs as the verdict is rendered not by one person, and it is a lot of and the probability of a mistake is much lower. Besides, the jury a little bit changes concept of fault or innocence, does them more clear to people. Guilty of a jury the person who acted from evil intention, instead of by mistake, abnormality, illiteracy and everything is considered that with it is connected. And guilty of our understanding it is understood that the person realized the actions, and it is even more interesting, could and had to realize.
- However in Russia there is a jury...
- In Russia there is a jury and, I think, as our jury is necessary, at least, on some category of affairs. There is no need to bring together jurors, say, on affairs about divorce, or on a lawsuit of children of war with the state. In those countries where there is a jury, there is a category of affairs on which consideration of the case with participation of jurors is obligatory, is, when category where the jury "gets out" at will. Also there are affairs on which jurors don't bring together never. Banal theft of chicken, for example, too happens different. One business when the malicious addict who didn't work day, gathered all old women, and absolutely another when the person has nothing to eat. Or any 15 - the summer boy took and dragged off this chicken. Actions are made same, and their assessment has to be absolutely different. And here the jury has to differentiate in any way it.
- Well, for such small affairs in the West there is a world judge...
- Yes, there is a world judge, and there is a settlement agreement. In general, if to talk small business, at us in criminal law, on - to mine, all "tired out" that only is possible. Small things everyone, any economic questions. It is necessary to change the legislation, maybe, "to decriminalize" some acts.
- Give everything - we will return to a jury. At opponents of a jury exists the following arguments - in order that in society this institute functioned, high level of consciousness in society is necessary. Say, our people won't manage to take out the correct assessment of this or that act. And the second argument that in our realities with jurors will be too, as with judges. Them either will intimidate, or will simply buy. How with it to be?
- I think that these arguments are decided and I can explain why. You look. The first option that our people won't understand.People at us quite normal, also are in most cases quite capable to distinguish "white" from "black". Perhaps they don't understand any legal subtleties, but I can tell about legal subtleties so - where 2 lawyers, 10 opinions. But that such is good and that such is bad at us people who stand on the earth, understand very well. Certainly, there are people spoiled, but also among judges there are spoiled. Then, number of jurors... It it is necessary to manage, take 13 idiots, or 13 villains... For this purpose it is necessary to try very much.
- Well. And how to be with intimidation?
- With intimidation?... Our people always frightened, frighten and will frighten. So, our people not from the timid. I here know a case when many years ago the Kiev bandits tried to bring the order to the Arsenal plant hostel. Arrived, started there someone intimidating... So, here wives here these workers took frying pans and quickly showed them their gangster place. I also know sufficient number of people whom and committee frightened, and of everything frightened... Well also didn't intimidate... Therefore to intimidate 13 jurors it is rather problematic.
- Well, and to buy - that is possible?
- It is possible to buy, probably, but... I often hear from people: "Why to me to be soiled? ". And so, why to the person who came once a year or to half a year who leads the life which has children which has a family, why to him to be soiled and assume someone's dirt. What for?
- You told that the person comes once a year. He is the simple worker, 1000 hryvnias get paid, for example... And that detain. And here it is given at once, say, 10 thousand dollars... For it this fortune! It will be able to resist from a temptation?
- And I will tell you another. In the people, nevertheless, there is an accurate concept about justly and injustly received money. And, by the way, among simple people, it is more than among those whom at us call by "elite". Simple people understand that money should be earned, instead of to select. And I had to face rather aggressive position of people to whom try to give not earned money. Therefore to buy the normal person rather difficult.
- Means, you consider, what moral level of our society is rather high that it was possible "to enter" a jury?...
- I consider that we, generally - that, normal society, at us have normal people who lead normal life which all perfectly understand and with all this will cope.
THERE, WHERE DOMINATE GREY, THE BLACK COME SOONER OR LATER...
- But then from your words a certain hopelessness grows. Then that there is no future at our state. Officials, judges, ministers... And what to do then?
- Difficult question. A lot of things after all disappear roots with century experience of Poles, Turks, Russians, well, generally - that, except for Potemkin Tavrichesky, probably, all the others than here were engaged? Scammed, so after all? High-ranking люд at us always I was thieves'. You remember when we spoke about a jury, I told that the people, people at us normal. We have officials spoiled.
- But officials - that of the people come. They after all not are on a silver platter...
- Yes, they really come from the people, but in - the first, get to a certain system, and secondly, not all after all from the people. Here you look, now people at us in court put a door. At them heavy, in principle, work. Both go and ask them: "You want to be the deputy? ". Most likely will answer: "no". Go and ask our engineers. Ask them too most, well there is an opportunity, suppose, to become the deputy. No. Because is both certain concepts and sinfulnesses, abnormality of these of all directions. That is, about what we spoke - is things to which it is impossible to aspire, it is impossible to want.
And here this psychology, with the huge sums of bribes, they turn after all not on the earth, they turn where that there above, any fabulous sums, dragging of any bills which nobody is going to carry out. And here it should be reconstructed. It is necessary that eventually people understood that to them to live here. And here listen to those who a little - мальски can speak about something. Somebody says, what he will live here? Listen to our election programs. In total. One speak - Russia will help us. Others speak - the European Union will help us. And nobody says that I will do. And here while it won't stop while all won't understand, eventually, that to us here to live...
- Or perhaps in general never will stop?...
- Strugatsky have such novel "It Is Difficult to Be God".And there it is written that sooner or later here this here all dullness and evil spirits will be compelled to be considered, but she doesn't want to be considered. But, it will be compelled to reckon with healthy forces.
- At Strugatsky it is written on - to another. There, where dominate gray, the black come sooner or later... In the novel, by the way, and it turned out - black monks came to change to gray attack planes.
- Yes. Where gray, early comes black, but it can't infinitely proceed. It is impossible to take infinitely and to put nothing. After all all the same sooner or later it is necessary to reckon with those who something does.
- But, as the history of our independence shows, infinitely it is impossible, but 18 years are possible...
- And what such 18 years?... Unless in historical scale it is a lot of?
ON JUDGES ALL PRESS!
- And as the thought will seem to you such here, strange, at first sight. Perhaps for candidates in the judge instead of three years to work as the lawyer, it will be better than 3 years where - that to pass obedience? Whether the deep belief, here such internal conviction of the person is capable to serve as a peculiar safety lock from bribery?
- It is capable. That's it about what you said, here this representation that I decide destinies. Well, it in general blasphemy. Any abuse will say goodbye, but the abuse on spirit sacred isn't present. It is blasphemous. You can't solve. Also shouldn't apply for it. You consider case. You as Tolstoy wrote, from one pieces of paper copy in others. That's all. You to decide destinies not in the right. There are other forces which do it.
- Forces - that, maybe, and others, only the sentence is pronounced by the specific judge. For example, what such to give to the person of 10 years? We will assume, to it 40. All know, what conditions in our prisons. What with it becomes in 10 years? And it after all the judge individually makes the decision?
- Well, in principle yes.
- Here also it turns out what exactly the judge and decided destiny of the specific person. How you this freight - doesn't press?
- Refereeing if to be engaged in it on - to the present, it at all and not work, is a heavy burden. It is a certain way of life, generally - that. Old judges - I communicate with the presiding judge who already on pension - and so when we invite him, he stares wide-eyed at us and speaks: "Judges have to be modest, imperceptible". It is lifestyle. It is wrong when, the judge dissects on the smart car.The car is necessary to you - well buy the car - such simply to go, instead of to surprise people. There are after all normal cars, usual, which not to show off, and for movement.
- How really presently to pressure the judge in any way? For example, to intimidate, influence physically?
- If the way of life of the judge consists to "the house - work - the house", and at work till 10th evening and it is desirable from 8th morning, it is almost impossible. And here if the judge gads on bars, drinks etc., then, of course, it is possible.
- You as the judge faced threats?
- Happened, but I don't perceive it seriously. And in principle I knew the doctor, really big doctor who told that I go here for watch on the Losiny island in Moscow and four approach, one knife waves. It so shifted a cigarette from a hand in a hand and asks: "Children, to you that? ". They as - that suddenly also drooped: "Yes so, there was a wish to warm up". They understood that it is the person absolutely other warehouse, from other world, it doesn't give in to their actions, and ran up.
- Well with it it is clear, and here administrative influence. From officials, from the presiding judge, for example. What at you, by the way, relationship between the judge and the presiding judge? He can order to make the "necessary" decision on the such - that to business …
- Isn't present …
- It is formal … And actually?
- Can speak, of course, and here order... Here, for example, the chairman of our court - at it is 30 years of a judicial experience, it worked much, lived much, to it under 60 years. There is at it both knowledge and experience. Naturally, knowing about any business, he can make any observations. They can be correct, can be wrong but how to force me them to realize. It is impossible!
- The judge as - that we depend on the presiding judge?
- Sure… Generally in household questions: table, chair, office, stool … But, as presently chairs and tables aren't present neither for "obedient" judges, nor for "obstinate", it turns out that in any way. Certainly, the presiding judge can create to the judge any minor problems - to organize any check, still something. But generally - that it is frivolous. In due time one of lawyers, current, said to me that while you take nothing, all the rest isn't serious.
- And officials, we will assume there the Executive Committee of the City Soviet of People's Deputies, regional administration?
- Practically not … Because again - it everything at the level of conversations. Well, what they can really make? They can where - at any meeting to tell that that the judge Aleynikov bad. Well and what? There will be 100 people who will tell that it good. Actually, neither that, nor another means nothing. Well doesn't love, we will assume me, the chairman of the regional state administration, well and that … Well you don't love - don't love further.
- Well, and attempts of influence are … Whether happened in your practice of the address, hints like "You this business treat more attentively …"?
- I was familiar with one woman - the judge in Russia - it worked 40 years the judge of district court. And so, she said that on the judge all press: lawyers, the prosecutor, press everything participants of process. There are hundreds ways of pressure. When the grandmother in court starts being cried as it is done often by grandmothers: "Oh, the sonny, I am such patient! I can't any more! Help, the sonny! ". Or when women hysterics - all this after all too start roaring, arranging pressure, maybe subconscious, but nevertheless attempt to affect the judge. Or when the person comes and speaks: "I on you will write the complaint" - he too thus tries to press. Publications in mass media, especially unilateral - too pressure. So always. Everyone tries to prove the case, any methods available to it … It is necessary to react to it simply quietly … It is such work. It isn't necessary to turn on this attention - well called, and called... Do the work as it is necessary - and all.
THE JUDGE CAN RESCUE FROM "SETUP" ONLY CUT?
- Recently Verkhovna Rada adopted the law according to which in case of bribery over 61 thousand hryvnias which undertakes the official, he is punished by imprisonment for 15 years. If on similar act the judge, or the public prosecutor's worker, a punishment measure only and uncontested - a life imprisonment without the right of pardon and with confiscation of all property comes across. As far as, I understand this law unprecedented. As though you could comment on this law from the point of view of the judge to whom probably in the future it is necessary such measure and to apply.
- We will tell so, first uncontested articles don't happen. It is legally wrong. It is legally wrong technology.
- But in this case it quite so...
- It is legally illiterate. At us in the country as - that still with 30-x years, I was 56 without the right of correspondence... "Change to the Homeland" and that such nobody could understand this. That we had still change any there to something... And Solzhenitsyn as - that wrote that at us crimes as though are born not on a defect whim, and in accurate compliance with Decrees of the Central Committee of CPSU. That is, as soon as accepted CPSU Central Committee the Decree about fight against moonshining at us at once there was one million moonshiners. As soon as accepted at us CPSU Central Committee the Decree about fight against speculation, at once for flowers on Soviet at us started putting for 10 years. As and here. I don't think that this law will stop someone. Because that who takes such sums that knows to whom to give to avoid criminal liability.
- But, the sum that after all agree and not the transcendental... Now hardly anyone - that you will surprise with 61 thousand hryvnias... Here, for example, at Zvarycha of 100 thousand dollars only in an office found and houses one million, and here it is less than 10 thousand even...
- Well, I think that... In any case, there is a version, it periodically arises that it again - any games of politics. Someone wants to be counted with someone.
- But, in this case who? The only author of this bill is Anatoly Gritsenko. It "goes" on presidential elections. And it positions this bill as the merit in fight against bribery...
- Well, the person probably very badly read history. Both Russian, and other. It is known that on Red Square at the time of public executions of thieves pickpockets collected the biggest tribute. Also it is the fact! The fact speaking about much! It means that anything stopped nobody. The only thing that it made this law so it gave "trump" in order that... Well if any honest prosecutor or if the judge honestly considers cases suddenly is brought, after all to set up him there are no problems.
- Here, just and following question. Whether it is possible to press by means of this law?
- Naturally. I don't remember at whom, but at any of the Russian classics is written that any chief told it that it will trample it, I apologize in shit. On it the classic wasn't frightened because he accurately knew that if he there won't enter, there anybody and won't drown him. But, possibilities of our law enforcement agencies rather big... Than business will end not clearly... Therefore the way to threaten it is unambiguous.Than will end? Maybe there is nothing, but an occasion to fray nerves that after all the decent. The only thing than it can end it with simply one more increase in a way of pressure. It is possible because as though to think up anything. Opportunities having invented it isn't limited. And to prove that you settled always that and it is possible.
- That is, if I correctly understood you this law won't affect a situation about bribery in any way...
- Won't affect in any way...
- And, in your opinion, it is capable to become if not opportunity to imitate bribery is a cudgel then the lever of pressure upon the judge from those at whom we will tell?
- Yes. I think that it can become such cudgel. You understand, in principle all this can be avoided. That is, with these structures it is possible to manage very quietly and they won't make anything in one case - if to be the monk. There they are absolutely useless (laughs).
THE STATE POSITION - TO RAISE MONEY FROM THE PEOPLE AT ANY COST!
- One more subject which would be to be mentioned in our conversation is a perfection of the Ukrainian legislation. We touched upon this subject during conversation already a little. Than the judge - is guided by spirit of the law or its letter?
- The district court everything is has to be guided by a law letter.
- It was necessary to come up to you against situations when the letter of the law contradicts spirit of the law? What do you do in such cases?
- It was necessary. What I do in such cases? I study a question thoroughly: I read Laws, explanations, comments. There is an Institute of the state and the right of a name of Koretsky. They prepare comments for all Laws. Another thing is that it is the academic institute, and to provide all real situations which arise at application of this or that Law, they can't. But generally, district courts all - have to be guided by a law letter. The court is law-enforcement body, instead of right interpretative.
But our legislation such is what to be guided by its letter is impossible theoretically - many failures. It is necessary to look for exits, to address, for example, to the Constitution, as to the Law of direct action.
- And the identity of the defendant how is capable to influence or not to influence decision-making by the judge? For example, in the same Administrative Code it is told that punishment on the violator is imposed taking into account the personality. That means:the big chief is one, and the simple driver - another?.
- No. Financial position, causes of infringement is considered, for example. We will tell, the most widespread violation - speed excess. But one business when you exceed speed because "борзометр" reads off scale, - when the tyazhelobolny wife you carry another to hospital. One business when the person has here an orientation: I can't slowly go - and all. And quite another matter, when here and so it turned out.
- You should consider cases on traffic violations of the rules?
- Yes. Hundred statements of claim!
- Here let's consider such situation. The driver with a speed of 60 kilometers per hour goes. At distance of meters 50 it remove by means of the Viewfinder device. And behind, at distance of meters three hundred, it is caught up by other car, the bigger size, with the chromeplated bumper etc. Also it flies with a speed of 120 kilometers. As a result: on a photo my car, and actually a locator recorded the speed of other vehicle. How to be? Our readers come up against situations of this sort constantly...
- To appeal to court. Now practice goes big on cancellation and, I think that so it and will be farther. It is too much defects with these "Viewfinders", all didn't think over thoroughly, from a bay - барахты introduced... Generally, "wanted as better, and it turned out as always". Apparently, the position of the state is reduced to the following. If to count on figures, last year at us according to these letters of happiness was where - that 20 thousand affairs. Now for half a year - 10 thousand. To me for half a year I arrived 1000. That is, one tenth part. It turns out, the one tenth appeals in vessels, and nine tenth that all the same pays.
- The last figure which was published: since the beginning of year it is paid penalties on 500 million hryvnias. It is the serious sum.
- It turns out that all of them equally raised money. That is, against the one tenth appeal and will cancel - and God with them, but nine - that will pay the tenth!
- Whether it is cynical?
It is a state position. The position on children of war is even more cynical.
- And what with children of war?
- They in large quantities appeal to court - to them don't pay extra pension. The Law under which they need surcharge to pension was adopted.
And so, people appeal to court. Courts, naturally, pass decisions in their advantage - in full accordance with the Law.But the Pension fund appeals against these decisions in appellate court. In our case, to Odessa. Means, the claimant needs to go there. And for many of these pensioners - old, sick, ailing - and here - that to come the problem. And that to Odessa that on the world's end - for them almost same. Also it turns out that while the appellate court will consider while will pass the decision, it any more isn't required to much - taking into account age, diseases etc.
Besides, far after all not all from them appealed to courts. For example, claims gave to Berezanke and Domanevke almost everything. And here in Nikolaev on the Central and Factory areas about a third addressed - all the others simply waved a hand on this money. Here also it turns out: one waved a hand, others didn't live - for the state economy in pure form. As and with "Viewfinders" - an unclear toy, it is unclear in whose hands.
GORSOVETAPO'S ALL DECISIONS TO ALLOCATION OF LANDS UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN PARKS, THE INHABITED YARDS, SQUARES ARE ILLEGAL! BEHIND SOME EXCEPTION...
- In recent years Nikolaev the construction conflicts are in a fever. It is very difficult to protect people in this situation. The civil engineering firm has money, communications, the people in authorities. They are movable by gloss of a profit which looms ahead. And at inhabitants, often old men - pensioners, anything - neither communications, nor money for the lawyer. And all speak: go to court.
- Correctly speak. Business here not in money - should be paid all - navsy 3 hryvnias 40 kopeks of the state duty. On these intra domestic buildings the fatal decision of the Supreme Court which says was passed about 6 years ago that the house adjoining territory can't be distributed without consent of inhabitants. And nevertheless, it contrary to will of inhabitants distribute. Such decisions need to be cancelled, and all constructed - to take down. And after that all these buildings in the form of "candles" in the yards cancelled and will cancel. While the Supreme Court won't change the practice. And it never will change it. Because it is correct. The law says that people when privatize the apartment, they privatize also part of the house adjoining territory which passes to them into the general joint use. And it is impossible to dispose of the territory of this without consent with the owner.
By the way, I took out the similar decision in the claim of inhabitants from Faleevskaya, 91, Lenina, 13 etc.
- But then it turns out, what a huge number of decisions of the City Council on allocation of territories under building are illegal?
- Yes. So it also is.All decisions on the yards, on parks all aren't lawful. With one exception - if validly there is a consent of inhabitants to this construction.
- Vladimir Aleksandrovich, and at judges concept of career exists? Career growth any...
- Practically not. Well, the first, second, third, fifth class, but that you correctly understood, between the lowest and highest class a difference in 50 hryvnias. On anything more it doesn't influence.
- That is, it influences a salary, but in such sizes that...
- Yes. To say that is any career growth, probably, it is impossible. As for transition to superior courts, it not absolutely career. It is other work. That is, someone likes to accept citizens and to consider cases on the first instances, someone doesn't like to be engaged in it, but it is pleasant to reconsider papers. It is the second instance. Someone likes to leave and make the decision, it isn't pleasant to someone and it works only jointly. As though on the one hand it seems inferior court, on the other hand the owner in process. There superior court, but itself personally you can make nothing. Even request a piece of paper itself personally you can't, it has to be a joint decision. It not career, as in that sense, for example, as with the lieutenant and the general. It not higher or lower is another.
- Well, and finally. That we can "tell" lips of the judge Aleynikov to our readers: "It is possible - to find all justice in modern Ukrainian court? ".
- I think that is possible.
- Thanks for interview.