Lawyer Nosov did not attend the High Anti-Corruption Court for the hearing and to deliver his closing statement prior to sentencing
This was reported by “The Court Reporter”. Earlier, the SAPO stated that the High Anti-Corruption Court had found the lawyer guilty of offering an unlawful benefit to prosecutors at the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office.
A new detail has emerged in the case of lawyer Oleksiy Nosov, whom the High Anti-Corruption Court sentenced to 4 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.
According to “Court Reporter”, Nosov did not physically attend court for the closing arguments and final statement before sentencing. He participated in the hearing via video link.
The hearing was held in a partially closed session.
What the court decided
The High Anti-Corruption Court found lawyer Oleksiy Nosov guilty of offering $200,000 in unlawful benefits to prosecutors from the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office.
The court sentenced him to 4 years and 6 months’ imprisonment. Nosov was also banned from practising law for 3 years.
The verdict has not yet become final and may be appealed. Until the verdict becomes final, Nosov remains on bail.
According to the investigation, the money was to be handed over in exchange for a decision to transfer the criminal proceedings against his client to another pre-trial investigation body.
Nosov was the lawyer for businessman Mykhailo Kipperman in the case concerning the misappropriation of electricity from Ukrenergo.
In this case, NABU and the SAPO claimed losses of over 716 million hryvnias.
According to the investigation, in March 2022, United Energy LLC purchased electricity from the National Electricity Company “Ukrenergo”, but the funds for it were not paid in full. The electricity was subsequently sold to market participants, and the proceeds, according to the investigation, were transferred to the accounts of a foreign company.
The media have named Mykhailo Kipperman, former director of a department at Ukrenergo, Dmytro Kondrashev, and Yulia Frolova, chair of the board of Bank Alliance, as figures involved in the case.
What is important
Formally, participation in a hearing via video link does not invalidate procedural actions.
But the detail stood out because of the context: this concerns the closing arguments, the final statement and the verdict in a high-profile case involving a lawyer accused of attempting to influence prosecutors at the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) in exchange for $200,000.
The verdict itself is not yet final. Nosov may appeal it in the court of appeal.
Follow us on Telegram
