it is also known that natalia semenova systematically delayed the consideration of cases. about drunken driving, which allowed the offenders to avoid responsibility. in particular , out of 16 cases closed by the public virtue council, in 13 cases the judge had more than two months for consideration of the case and in three cases more than a month. for a period of time, postal correspondence was not sent, therefore deadlines were missed, well, that is, the deadline for bringing a person to administrative responsibility. deadlines were missed, i believe, not by the court. in the end, after investigating all the circumstances, the panel of the higher qualification commission dismissed judge semenov . as of today, i have everything, you watched judicial control, i am tetyana shustrova. tell us about the facts of corruption in the judicial system that you know. write to the email you see on the screen. or me on facebook. see you in exactly one week. see this week in the collaborators program. illegitimate ministers of the occupied donetsk region. on the territory of the dpr there is a state

investigator do, i didn’t understand the question, i’m sorry, the supreme council of justice brought natalia semenova that she constantly returned to the police reports on administrative violations on illegal grounds, if you in response to a question from the public integrity council, the prosecutor noted that the protocol itself was correct, drawn up... in accordance with the law, so what were the grounds for returning it, when at the same time your decision was simply not implemented? no. it is also known that nataliya semenova systematically delayed the consideration of drunken driving cases, which allowed violators to avoid responsibility. in particular, out of 16 cases closed by her, which were discovered by the public council of virtue, in 13 cases the judge had more than two months to consider the case, and in three in some cases - more than a month. at that time, postal correspondence was not sent, that is why deadlines were missed, well, that is, the deadline for bringing a person to administrative responsibility, who missed them? deadlines were missed, i consider it not the court. in the en

the supreme council of justice held natalia semenova accountable for the fact that she constantly returned to the police protocols on administrative violations on illegal grounds. if you pointed out to the question of the public council of virtue that the prosecutor's protocol was in itself. correct, compiled according to i will remove the legislation, then what grounds were there to return it, when at the same time your decision is simply not implemented? no. it is also known that nataliya semenova systematically delayed the consideration of cases of reckless driving, which allowed violators to avoid responsibility. in particular, out of the 16 cases closed by her, which were discovered by the public council of integrity, in 13 cases the judge had more than two months to consider the case and in three cases more than a month, during which period the postal correspondence was not sent, that is why the deadlines were missed, well then , that is, the term bringing a person to administrative responsibility, by whom the deadlines were missed, i believe, not by the court, in the end, after inve