In Kyiv there happened another attack on a advocate on the part of radical organizations
On 7 August 2018 in the premises of the Court of Appeal of the city of Kyiv members of the right-wing organization C14 attacked advocate Oleg Povalyaev.
Povalyaev participated in a court hearing, which was attended by several people with the symbols of one of the right-wing organizations, who throughout the court session, behaved in an openly provocative way, showing a complete disregard for the judicial process, trying to disrupt the hearing.
Following the comments of the advocate about the inadmissibility of such behavior, two of them grabbed the advocate's arms and the third person hit him in the face. After the adjournment of the hearing, advocate Oleg Povalyaev at the exit from the court was confronted by a group of about 30 young people. Shouting insults and obscenities they began to threaten him with physical violence due to the fact that the advocate, in their opinion, protects the "wrong guy".
On the part of the police, present during these events, there was no reaction. In fact the police were condoning the perpetrators of the crime.
"We see another precedent, when unknown persons in a way clear to them tell the advocate, who is eligible for legal assistance and who is not. Although the Constitution gives this right to everyone, obviously, members of this organization do not know about the provisions of the Basic Law, and the police, despite knowing it is indifferent with the violations of advocates' professional rights and citizens' constitutional rights”, stated the Chairman of the Committee on Protection of Advocates’ Professional Rights Hanna Boriak.
Concerning the specified fact Oleg Povalyaev filed a criminal complaint, currently the advocate undergoes a medical examination to determine the severity of injuries.
This situation will be reviewed at the next meeting of the UNBA Committee on Protection of Advocates’ Professional Rights, which will be held on 10 August 2018.
Popular news
Self-government
BCU: The HCJ’s decisions undermine the constitutional guarantees of the independence of the advocacy profession
The Bar Council of Ukraine has concluded that, in its recent decisions, the High Council of Justice has, without legal grounds, called into question the right of bar self-governing bodies to protect the guarantees of legal practice and has, in effect, attempted to grant one of its members — who retains the status of an advocate — special immunity from the Rules of professional conduct and disciplinary responsibility.
Interaction
The UNBA and the National Guard have agreed to cooperate on legal protection for military personnel
Servicemembers of the National Guard, their family members, and veterans are to receive additional legal tools to protect their rights, while the National Guard’s legal services will receive methodological and expert support.
Interaction
Protecting the rights of service members: The UNBA and the Military Ombudsman have agreed on cooperation
Servicemembers, reservists, conscripts during training exercises, members of local community volunteer units, and other individuals covered by the Law «On the Military Ombudsman» should have better access to professional legal assistance.
Rule of Law Roadmap
Reform without data and advocacy: what the Ministry of Justice’s launch has revealed
The Ministry of Justice hosted the first meeting of the working group on bar reform. But instead of professional preparation of legislative changes, we saw exactly what Armada Network Director Dale Armstrong had spoken about the day before in Kyiv: not reform, but a struggle for control over the agenda through a narrow circle of “stakeholders” who create an echo chamber of influence for themselves.
Rule of Law Roadmap
Advocacy, European integration and the limits of intervention: an American report presented in Kyiv
Following its presentation in Brussels, the report «The Ukrainian advocacy in the context of the rule of law and European integration» made its way to Kyiv. It highlighted critical issues both in understanding the very nature of the self-governing profession and in the emergence of a «shadow market» surrounding the Ukrainian advocacy.
Discussion
ETAIDF and MMC: where the system fails
The new system for assessing a person’s daily functioning and the practice of undergoing medical-legal examinations have already raised numerous questions — ranging from unclear procedures to difficulties in appealing decisions. These issues were examined by advocates during the roundtable discussion «Problematic issues of the ETAIDF and MMC», organized by the UNBA Committee on the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities and the All-Ukrainian public organization «Human rights union of persons with disabilities».
Rule of Law Roadmap
Access to the advocate profession: a subgroup has identified the direction of change
On Monday, March 16, a meeting was held of the subgroup «Access to the profession and training of advocates. Organizational forms of legal practice» of the Working Group on the implementation of the Rule of Law Roadmap.
Appointment
A representative of the UNBA has arrived in Cairo
Advocate Irena Maria Ostrozka-Sangushko has been appointed as the representative of the Ukrainian National Bar Association in the Arab Republic of Egypt, in the city of Cairo. The corresponding Order No. 80, dated March 10, 2026, was signed by the President of the UNBA, BCU Lidiya Izovitova.
Publications
Volodymyr Matsko Extradition during wartime: when the risks outweigh the request
Volodymyr Matsko Extradition as a systemic form of rights violations
Victoria Yakusha, Law and Business The anti-corruption vertical cannot «take care» of the Bar as an institution, - acting head of the HQDCB
Censor.net Protecting advocates – protecting justice: addressing concerns about the new law
Ihor Kolesnykov A BRIEF SUMMARY REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF THE ORDER ON EXTENDED CONFISCATION IN LATVIA REGARDING FINANCIAL ASSETS OF…
Valentyn Gvozdiy WORKING IN A WAR ZONE
Lydia Izovitova Formula of perfection
Sergiy Vylkov Our judicial system is so built that courts do not trust advocates