Chequered Blanket: The Case the President’s Representatives Didn’t Show Up For

Source: Author’s Facebook page

In trials of corrupt officials, a familiar trick often appeared: when an unfavourable decision loomed, they suddenly “fell ill.” An ambulance would arrive, and doctors, wrapping them in a standard chequered blanket, would whisk them away “for procedures.” In this way, a little time was always bought.

The chequered blanket became a symbol of crude cunning used to evade responsibility.

Today, the “chequered blanket” was on display in the Supreme Court. Zelenskyy’s representative did not appear — she “fell ill.” Moreover, there is a nuance. And not just one. After all, this is an administrative process.

First, it wasn’t merely the “representative” who failed to show up. In fact, Zelenskyy himself did not appear, because there is a principle of “self-representation.”

The party in question is the President as an institution, and therefore, there should have been a representative. For the State Administration of Affairs, whose employees are paid from the Presidential Office budget — which this year provides 5.25 billion UAH, and last year 4.2 billion — this is not a trivial matter.

So it was not a case of “they couldn’t find anyone to send.” It was a conscious decision not to appear. Why? Because they had already realized defeat.

Secondly, the administrative process has important features. Here, guilt is not established as in criminal cases, nor are competing “truths” weighed as in civil litigation. In an administrative case, a state body must justify the legality of its actions to the person asserting that their rights have been violated. Failure to appear in court is effectively an admission that there are no arguments to support the state’s position.

Finally, thirdly, after the ECHR decision in a recent sanctions case, a precedent has effectively been set: the President must justify his sanction decisions. In the case, M.S.L. v. In Ukraine, the European Court of Human Rights found that the lack of effective judicial review of Ukrainian sanctions violated the Convention, highlighting that national courts must provide meaningful oversight and justification in sanctions cases. Інтерфакс-Україна+1

The notion of “discretion” that the authorities tried to invoke does not hold up. Discretion is not arbitrariness, but the ability to choose between different lawful options. There is no legal basis for imposing sanctions on an individual Ukrainian citizen who is not a terrorist. Yet, faced with high‑profile personnel decisions, Zelenskyy wrapped himself in a “chequered blanket” in court.

He is buying time until the end of the month — likely to strengthen his “vertical” and put pressure on the judiciary so that, when elections come, they will unfold on his terms rather than through an open democratic process.

But attempts to turn Ukraine into Russia, Belarus, or Venezuela will not succeed.

If Zelenskyy has not learned this over nearly seven years in office, life itself will teach him — and not even a chequered blanket will save him then.

We will remind you that the day before, the representative of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy did not appear at the meeting of the Board of Judges of the Cassation Administrative Court of the Supreme Court, where the consideration of Petro Poroshenko’s lawsuit to cancel the illegal Decree on the introduction of sanctions continues.

Earlier, it emerged during the case proceedings that some of the documents justifying the imposed sanctions had been submitted to the NSDC retroactively. The decision was made, and the Decree was signed. At previous sessions of the Supreme Court, in particular, evidence of falsification of the decision on sanctions against Poroshenko was examined.

Petro Poroshenko’s lawyer Ihor Golovan noted after the Supreme Court session, which was postponed due to President Zelensky’s absence, that this is not the first time the authorities have resorted to delaying the process. “I really hope that all these tricks will eventually be exhausted, and the session on January 30 will take place,” the lawyer emphasized.

Meanwhile, the European Solidarity faction called on President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to lift illegal sanctions against Petro Poroshenko and stop using state instruments for electoral purposes. The faction stated that the authorities are deliberately delaying the trial to maintain sanctions against the opposition leader.

Also, follow “Pryamyi” on Facebook, Twitter, Telegram, and Instagram.

• Materials published in the “OPINIONS” section reflect the opinion of the author of the publication, who bears full responsibility for the accuracy of the information.
• The editorial staff of prm.ua may not share the opinions expressed in the author’s material.
• The owner of the webpage in the “OPINIONS” section is the author of the publication.