Compensation for emotional distress was awarded to a defendant after an advocate was denied access to him at the TDC

The State Treasury Service transferred 25,000 UAH in compensation for emotional distress to a person who had been detained at the temporary detention facility of the Main Directorate of the National Police in Kyiv. The court had previously awarded this compensation because the advocate was not allowed to meet with his client.

This was reported by a member of the Committee on the protection of advocates’ rights and guarantees of legal practice of the UNBA Maksym Stryhun, who served as the defense advocate in the criminal proceedings.

On April 27, 2021, M. Stryhun arrived at the temporary detention facility for a confidential meeting with his client. He presented the legal aid agreement, his advocate’s license, and his certificate of eligibility to practice law. However, the meeting was denied due to the absence of a written notification from the person or authority handling the criminal case authorizing the advocate to act as defense counsel. In doing so, the detention center staff member cited the Internal Rules of Procedure. Just three days later, a district court ruling ordered the head of the temporary detention center to ensure that the detainee could meet with his defense attorney, and the meeting finally took place on May 5.

A separate lawsuit was filed seeking a declaration that the actions of the Main Directorate of the National Police in Kyiv regarding the denial of access to the defense attorney were unlawful. On April 4, 2025, the Kyiv District Administrative Court granted these claims, also awarding the plaintiff 100,000 UAH in compensation for emotional distress.

In a ruling dated October 7, 2025, the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal agreed with the trial court’s conclusion that the officials’ actions were unlawful.

The appeal was based on the premise that, under Article 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a defense attorney’s authority is confirmed by a certificate of eligibility to practice law and one of the following documents: a warrant, a contract with the defense attorney, or a referral from a legal aid agency. The Code of Criminal Procedure prohibits the imposition of additional conditions for confirming an advocate’s authority. Therefore, the documents provided by the advocate were sufficient to grant him access to his client. The requirement for written confirmation from the authority conducting the criminal proceedings was contrary to criminal procedure law.

At the same time, since this involved a single instance of denial of access and the advocate’s access was subsequently granted, the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal reduced the compensation for non-pecuniary damages to 25,000 UAH.

«It is important that the recognition of the violation did not remain merely at the level of a court decision but had real financial consequences. Because compensation for the unlawful actions of officials will, in fact, serve as a deterrent, - commented M. Stryhun on the case. - The risk of budgetary losses should prompt the leadership of law enforcement agencies to more closely monitor their employees’ compliance with the law».

As a reminder, the issue of defense advocates’ access to individuals held in pretrial detention centers was discussed in March 2026 during a roundtable at the UNBA. In particular, advocates reported instances where they were required to provide additional confirmation of their representation in cases.