Update on Supreme Court Judges
The Supreme Court has not initiated any internal probes concerning judges Ihor Dashutin and Larysa Rogach in connection with the National Anti-Corruption Bureau’s (NABU) 'Femida' operation. As of the response date, both judges remain active in their judicial roles. Meanwhile, Member of Parliament Nina Yuzhanina expressed concern about potential interference by Irina Mudra, Deputy Head of the President’s Office, influencing Ihor Dashutin, the head of the Administrative Cassation Court. Yuzhanina warned this could exert pressure on other judges involved in the case concerning Petro Poroshenko.
On April 11, 2026, Irina Mudra and Mykytas discussed the possibility of leveraging Dashutin to sway judicial decisions in Poroshenko’s case against President Zelensky regarding sanctions. As part of the 'Femida' investigation, NABU detectives conducted searches at Ihor Dashutin’s premises on August 19, 2026. Earlier, in April 2026, Petro Poroshenko publicly alleged Mudra’s influence over the Supreme Court.
Judicial Influence and Official Statements
Judge Olga Kashpur submitted a leave request approved by Ihor Dashutin shortly before the April 3, 2026 court session scheduled to announce the ruling in Poroshenko’s case. Poroshenko’s lawyer, Illia Novikov, is preparing a formal complaint to the High Council of Justice, citing possible pressure on judges within the Supreme Court’s Administrative Cassation Chamber.
The Supreme Court rejected Poroshenko’s lawsuit seeking to overturn the sanctions; although the verdict was initially set for April 3, 2026, the announcement was postponed. Judge Mykhailo Smokovych issued a dissenting opinion, criticizing the legality of the sanctions imposed on Poroshenko. Presiding judge Olesia Radyshevska noted that the sanctions were introduced without substantive evidence, relying solely on a single letter from the State Financial Monitoring Service.
“Regarding inquiries about internal investigations or other disciplinary actions against Supreme Court judges, we confirm that no such measures have been undertaken,” stated the Supreme Court.
The Court also clarified that it cannot comment on assumptions linking these matters to criminal proceedings referenced by NABU within the 'Femida' operation. As of the response date, both Dashutin and Rogach continue to perform their judicial duties.
This unfolding situation involving Supreme Court judges and alleged influence from the President’s Office has sparked significant public and political debate. The absence of internal investigations risks undermining trust in Ukraine’s judiciary, especially amid sensitive cases involving prominent political figures. It highlights the critical need for transparency and judicial independence in a country striving to combat corruption and resist political interference.
As the situation unfolds, the implications of potential judicial influence are becoming increasingly evident. Recently, Iryna Mudra's custody ruling has raised questions about the integrity of judicial processes, particularly in light of ongoing concerns regarding the actions of key figures within the Supreme Court. This development could further complicate the already tense atmosphere surrounding the cases involving high-profile political figures.