Anton Liashchenko: “Political preconception of the experts of the Kiev research institute of judicial expert examinations, as an instrument of a factual adjudgment”
During performing of my advocatory activity on ascribeding of a judicial support, I received information about numerous rough violations regarding the requirements of the current legislation and incompetence of the experts of the Kiev research institute of judicial expert examinations at time of expertize arranging initiated by the employees of the law enforcement authorities.
In support of the mentioned incorrespondence of the expert examinations performed in KNIISE (КНИИСЭ) to the acting requirements of the legislation, there is a number of receptions on conclusions of the experts made by the accredited independent expert organizations with the qualified specialists of the legal and technical branch in their staff with the work experience of more than 30 years.
According to their recensions, rather frequent violations are, as follows:
violation of the principles of legality, objectiveness and fullness of the investigation determined by Article 3 of the Law of Ukraine “About judicial expertize”;
violation of the scientific and methodic recommendations on the issues of preparation and appointing expertizes and expert investigations;
reference of the experts onto ‘mythic’ materials on the basis which the corresponding conclusions are made;
using of an incomplete list of the regulatory documents the enumeration of which is necessary for making conclusions;
absence of the expertize subject investigation in conclusions of KNIISE (КНИИСЭ);
an obvious passage of the experts outward their competence;
incorrespondence of the expertizes with the requirements stipulated by Article 69 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine;
violation of the Regulation about qualifications commissions and appraisals of judicial experts.
In consideration of the above said herein, we can observe some traits of systematicity of the obvious violations by the experts of KNIISE (КНИИСЭ). Herewith, the indicated rough requirement violations, as for the legislation, take place mainly at arranging expertizes to fulfil the Decisions of the preliminary investigation bodies, that is, at time of the criminal proceedings.
At present, in KNIISE (КНИИСЭ) they perform, all in all, near 10 various expertizes within the criminal proceeding intended for the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (НАБУ) in which I deliver my judicial help. I wouldn’t like to believe that all of them will be such, as they are ‘seen’ by KNIISE (КНИИСЭ) experts. And, more than that, I wouldn’t like to believe that the employees of the law enforcement authorities influence the expertize results using their administrative pressure.
However, in our imperfect state, and judging by the own experience, I can’t get rid of the thought that conclusions of the experts ‘about absence of the property damage on the criminal proceedings’ in some way are ‘unfavourable’ for the law enforcement authorities, and one may suppose that the experts of KNIISE (КНИИСЭ) make the abovementioned incompetent conclusions on ‘request’ of the law enforcement officials which for other people are life-changing.
Hence, find necessary, consolidate all who are acknowledged with the facts of such violations and to protect together our rights and justice.