The High Council of Justice (HCJ) has upheld the disciplinary chamber’s decision to dismiss Viktoria Prykhodko, a judge of the Maryinka District Court of the Donetsk Oblast (seconded to the Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Zaporizhzhia). Following a report by disciplinary inspector Ihor Tron, the Council confirmed the grounds for her permanent removal. The severe penalty stems from her systemic justification of Russia’s armed aggression in private correspondence and the orchestration of an illegal «judicial conveyor belt» issuing staged court rulings.
During disciplinary proceedings, it was established that between October 28, 2022, and January 13, 2024, Prykhodko regularly communicated with another judge via private messenger. In these chats, she repeatedly denied the reality of Russian aggression against Ukraine, validated the military invasion initiated in 2014, and justified the temporary occupation of Ukrainian territories.
These facts were substantiated by a forensic linguistic examination conducted by the State Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Expertise (NDKETS) on June 6, 2025. Following these findings, law enforcement authorities served the judge with a formal notice of suspicion under Part 3 of Article 436-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
«The NDKETS forensic examination confirmed that the judge’s correspondence contains explicit linguistic markers validating the occupation of Ukrainian territory and denying the armed aggression of the Russian Federation.»
Beyond her ideological stance, the HCJ investigation exposed a scheme involving highly dubious legal proceedings. A complaint filed against Prykhodko highlighted the artificial nature of numerous civil cases. She consistently handled trials in atypically short timeframes, systematically ignoring procedural norms and failing to verify factual circumstances.
The Disciplinary Chamber found that hearings in two main categories were entirely imitative:
Family disputes: Cases involving divorce, determining a child’s place of residence, and establishing sole custody (specifically cases № 237/3023/24, № 237/3538/24, № 237/927/24, and № 237/31/24).
Civil status cases: Legal declarations of incapacity, establishing guardianship, and appointing official guardians (cases № 237/2856/24, № 237/3769/24, № 237/4144/24, and № 237/3052/24).
The HCJ concluded that these hearings were conducted purely as a formality to expedite the delivery of requested legal documents.
Judge Viktoria Prykhodko failed to attend the final hearing of the High Council of Justice. Instead, she submitted a written motion requesting a suspension of the disciplinary review. The HCJ rejected the motion as unfounded and upheld the January 14 decision for her dismissal. This removal marks a significant step in purging the Ukraine judicial system of corrupt officials and individuals affiliated with the aggressor state.