The sanctions case against Poroshenko is a marker of what’s happening in the country, says lawyer Novikov.
The panel of judges of the Cassation Administrative Court, part of the Supreme Court, will continue to consider Petro Poroshenko’s claim to overturn the illegal decree imposing sanctions on November 7.
This was reported by the fifth president’s lawyer, Ilya Novikov.
As is well known, the authorities attempted to keep the entire process secret, so the documents on the basis of which the sanctions were imposed are classified as “for official use only” and require closed hearings. However, the case materials were recently released by a number of media outlets, and they appear to contain no compelling basis for sanctions against Poroshenko.
“We’ve just finished our latest hearing, which was closed to the public, and the next one may also be closed. Let me remind you that we’ve been in this process for over six months now. We filed our lawsuit in early March, and from April through October, at every hearing, when asked a question, we heard the stereotypical response that we’d hear the answer to that question when we examine the evidence, classified as a DSK, in a closed hearing. I can say we haven’t heard that answer, and I don’t think we ever will. Because there’s no good answer to that question,” the lawyer states.
Novikov noted that the process of preparing the urgent proposal for sanctions against Poroshenko was directly supervised by the Presidential Commissioner for Sanctions Policy, Vladislav Vlasyuk.
“If you saw the documents that were made public, it was clear that the document called ‘Meeting Minutes,’ although it’s unclear what meeting it was, doesn’t have any government body within which these people conferred. The then-Minister of Economy, Svirdenko, was there, as was the head of Financial Monitoring, the newly appointed Pronin, and Zelenskyy’s advisor, Vlasyuk. Svirdenko’s deputy, now the Minister of Economy, was there, having inherited her position. And one of the Ministry of Economy’s technical staff was there. Five people. They don’t create anything resembling a quorum in the interdepartmental sanctions group, which has the Cabinet’s authority to deal with the development of sanctions drafts,” Novikov noted.
“This is quite serious incriminating evidence against the people who were there. Do you understand the fundamental scandal of this situation? Zelenskyy, when he spoke the following day, February 13, said, ‘I was shocked, they reported such terrible information to me, everyone will be shocked.’ And we understand that his sanctions representative, Vlasyuk, not only oversaw this process but also sped it up. The published report noted that, at Vlasyuk’s suggestion, the draft needed to be ready for signature at the National Security and Defense Council meeting on February 12 within 3-4 hours of this meeting,” Novikov stated.
“We need to understand that for Zelenskyy, these sanctions were his personal project. This isn’t just our assumption; it’s documented. And even this story, which was personally important to him—the quality of its implementation, the number of easily avoidable mistakes—compromises this situation, revealing the interference and how it’s being guided. Most likely, other issues are being managed in the same way, and the quality of the decisions is similar,” Novikov suggests.
“That’s why this story is important. It’s not just about Poroshenko; it’s a very important marker of what’s happening in Ukraine,” says Ilya Novikov.
Earlier in the case , it became known that some of the documents on the basis of which the sanctions were imposed were submitted to the National Security and Defense Council retroactively, after the decision had been made and the Decree had been signed.
Earlier, President Zelenskyy’s representative to the Supreme Court acknowledged that changes were made to the signed decree implementing the National Security and Defense Council’s decision on sanctions against Poroshenko, which she called “technical amendments.”
According to lawyer Ihor Golovan, the Vinnytsia District Administrative Court’s ruling on Petro Poroshenko’s lawsuit against the National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) staff and the NSDC Secretary entered into force on July 31. “In particular, it was established that the Decree and its appendix, which was sent for the president’s signature and dated February 12, 2025, contained errors. Specifically, Petro Poroshenko’s identification code contained 11 digits instead of 10. Accordingly, the court established that the President had enacted the Decree.” The court also noted that current Ukrainian legislation does not provide for the possibility of correcting errors or amending regulatory legal acts, including decisions of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine and presidential decrees, outside the established procedure for adopting the relevant act.
President Zelenskyy’s spokesperson also confirmed earlier during the meeting that the National Bank of Ukraine illegally imposed financial restrictions on Petro Poroshenko.
Also follow “Pryamy” on Facebook , Twitter , Telegram and Instagram.