Supreme Court postpones cassation hearing for former State Judicial Administration chief
The Supreme Court has postponed until September 22 the consideration of appeals against the verdict sentencing former head of the State Judicial Administration, Oleksiy Salnikov, to 3 years in prison for abuse of influence.
As is known, the High Anti-Corruption Court found former SJA Chairman Oleksiy Salnikov guilty of abuse of influence and sentenced him to 3 years in prison. The Appeals Chamber of the High Anti-Corruption Court left this verdict unchanged.
The defense filed cassation appeals against this verdict and proceedings were opened. The Supreme Court completed preparations for the hearing and scheduled a hearing for July 28. However, the convicted Salnikov filed a motion to postpone the hearing due to illness and poor health.
The motion of the convicted person (Salnikov – ed.) shall be partially granted. The consideration of the criminal proceedings against (Salnikov – ed.) in the cassation instance shall be postponed until 2:30 p.m. on September 22, 2026, and the participants in the court proceedings shall be notified thereof.
Alexey Salnikov is a suspect in the EBK database.
Recall that, according to the prosecution, the head of the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine received $7,500 from an individual in March of this year. He was supposed to keep part of these funds for himself, and $5,000 was supposed to be transferred to the judges of the Supreme Court for making a decision in the interests of a commercial enterprise.
In the future, the head of the State Judicial Service Commission promised to assist in the decision-making by the judges of the Supreme Court, in particular by involving its former head Vsevolod Knyazev. However, after the former head of the Supreme Court of Ukraine was exposed for receiving illegal benefits, Salnikov's behavior changed dramatically and he began to evade resolving the issue, but without intending to return the illegal benefits he received.
We previously reported that the HACC assigned the case to a judge of the Northern Economic Court of Appeal.
