shop now
The Shevchenkivskyi District Court in Kyiv on Sept. 23 ruled in favor of Andriy Portnov, a former top official in ex-President Viktor Yanukovych’s administration, in a defamation case against several news outlets, including the Kyiv Independent.
Portnov challenged a reference to him as a “pro-Russian” politician and a person “infamous for his open support for Russia.”
The lawsuit concerns a story by Glib Kanievskyi, then a Ukrainian journalist and currently a defense ministry official, published in several news outlets, including the Kyiv Independent, in September 2023.
The story was an investigative report pointing out that Ukrainian officials impose sanctions on petty pro-Russian politicians, but ignore the most high-profile ones. Portnov was listed as one of the examples: He is under sanctions in the U.S., but not in Ukraine.
In response to the story, Portnov sued the author of the report and the news outlets that ran it, including Statewatch, LB.ua, and Kyiv Independent as represented by Chief Editor Olga Rudenko.
Portnov, a lawyer, is known as one of the most litigious Ukrainian ex-officials.
In 2021, Portnov was added to the U.S. sanctions list over allegations that he was involved in corruption in Ukraine, particularly in the judiciary.
In the commentary that ran with the sanctions inclusions, the U.S. treasury wrote that Portnov “cultivated extensive connections to Ukraine’s judicial and law enforcement apparatus through bribery.”
“Widely known as a court fixer, Portnov was credibly accused of using his influence to buy access and decisions in Ukraine’s courts and undermining reform efforts,” reads the U.S. Treasury website. “As of 2019, Portnov took steps to control the Ukrainian judiciary, influence associated legislation, sought to place loyal officials in senior judiciary positions, and purchase court decisions. In mid-2019, Portnov colluded with a high ranking Ukrainian government official to shape the country’s higher legal institutions to their advantage and influence Ukraine’s Constitutional Court. Additionally, Portnov has been involved in an attempt to influence the Ukrainian Prosecutor General.”
In 2010-2014, Portnov served in the administration of then-President Yanukovych. In February 2014, Yanukovych and his administration were ousted by the protests known as the EuroMaidan Revolution. Over the course of the next few years, Ukrainian authorities looked into Portnov’s activities as part of a number of criminal investigations, including one that concerned high treason and alleged that Portnov had a role in the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014. The case was closed in 2019.
According to media reports, Portnov doesn’t currently reside in Ukraine.
The Kyiv Independent’s Chief Editor Olga Rudenko and other defendants will appeal the ruling.
“It’s a sad irony that an ex-official sanctioned over allegations of holding undue influence over Ukrainian courts wins a case against journalists — in a Ukrainian court,” said Rudenko. “It’s alarming because it’s symptomatic of the endemic problems in the Ukrainian judiciary. We are going to fight this ruling until the highest possible judicial instance.”
The lawyers who defended the journalists in the case said that there were obvious violations in the ruling.
“The court pronounced value judgment ‘false information’ while a value judgment can’t be disproved,” said Oksana Maksymeniuk, head of the legal department of the Regional Press Development Institute, whose lawyers represent the media sued by Portnov. “This ruling was certainly carried out with violations, and it will be appealed.”
Dinara Khalilova
