After over a year of court hearings, the attorneys defending three Ukrainian teenagers convicted of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl in Zakarpattia Oblast have asked the court to close the case against them. The three teenage boys committed the crime back in 2021, filmed it on camera, and posted the video online, for which the court in western Ukraine gave them only two years of probation and a fine last March. The court’s decision caused a nationwide scandal, prompting several lawyers to take the girl’s case pro bono and fight for a stricter verdict. As the trial neared its final stage, the defense filed a motion to close the criminal proceedings on Oct. 4, the same day the court debates were scheduled, essentially disrupting the conclusion of the process.
According to attorney Illia Vorobyov, the defense is trying to take advantage of the fact that the girl did not attend all court sessions, claiming it as her refusal to support the prosecution. The defense’s attempt to delay the proceedings is seen as an act of cynicism, as it would require the girl to relive the traumatic events by attending all court hearings in detail. The crime involved the girl being hit in the stomach, her head squeezed between one of the boys’ legs, and acts of sexual nature causing her physical pain. The court’s decision to give a soft sentence in 2023 was based on categorizing the crime as sexual violence, not rape, which carries a lesser punishment according to the Ukrainian Criminal Code. The defense hopes the court debates will occur by the end of October, where they will request imprisonment for the accused rather than a suspended sentence.
The case highlights the issue of handling sexual assault cases in Ukraine, with discrepancies in the severity of punishment for rape versus sexual violence. Attorney Anna Kalynchuk emphasized that the pain, humiliation, and stress caused by sexual violence are the same as in rape cases. The defense’s lack of genuine remorse or admission of guilt from the accused during the trial further strengthens the prosecution’s stance in seeking imprisonment for the teenagers. The victim’s limited participation in court hearings was allowed to prevent re-traumatization, as questioning witnesses and examining evidence can be emotionally challenging. The defense’s attempt to close the case based on the girl’s absence in some sessions is viewed as a deliberate delay tactic aimed at avoiding punishment for the accused.
The court’s statement detailed the events of the assault, including the physical harm caused to the victim, the removal of her clothes, and the sexual acts performed by the teenagers. The decision to categorize the crime as sexual violence rather than rape was based on the absence of penetration into the victim’s body, resulting in a softer punishment for the accused. The attorneys representing the victim are pushing for a stricter verdict, advocating for imprisonment rather than probation for the teenagers involved in the assault. The case has sparked national outrage and debate on the handling of sexual assault cases in Ukraine, shedding light on the need for more comprehensive laws and regulations to protect victims and ensure justice is served.
As the trial reaches its final stages, the defense’s efforts to close the case based on technicalities, such as the victim’s limited participation, are met with criticism and opposition from the prosecution and legal representatives fighting for the victim’s justice. The intended outcome of the court debates at the end of October will determine the fate of the accused teenagers, with the possibility of a more severe punishment being sought by the prosecution. The case serves as a stark reminder of the challenges faced in addressing and prosecuting sexual assault cases, highlighting the need for a more victim-centered approach and just legal system that prioritizes the well-being and rights of survivors.
