Supreme Court Judge Slams Sanctions on Poroshenko: Lawsuit Should Have Been Upheld.

Dissenting Opinion by Judge Olesya Radyshevska

According to 5 канал — Політика: In a dissenting opinion filed on July 10, 2026, in case No. 990/80/25, presiding judge of the Administrative Cassation Court Olesya Radyshevska argued that the lawsuit brought by Petro Poroshenko against Volodymyr Zelenskyy should have been granted. The legal challenge, submitted in March 2025, sought to annul Presidential Decree No. 81/2025, which imposed indefinite sanctions.

The court’s decision came after the State Financial Monitoring Service of Ukraine sent a letter on February 12, 2025, which served as the key basis for enacting the sanctions. Notably, all steps—from that letter to the signing of the decree—were completed within a single day. Despite this, the majority of judges on the Administrative Cassation Court voted to dismiss the lawsuit.

Criticism of the Ruling’s Speed

In her separate opinion, Radyshevska highlighted the abnormally fast pace of the decision-making process. She pointed out that the Ministry of Economy, as the initiator,

“merely replicated the content of the State Financial Monitoring Service’s letter and conducted no independent assessment of the plaintiff’s actions or activities.”

“the letter itself does not reflect any analytical work regarding financial transactions or terrorism financing.”

The judge also stressed that judicial oversight of sanctions-related decisions cannot be superficial or limited to a procedural check. She identified errors in the taxpayer registration number (RNOCPP) and described the set of prohibitions as a chaotic collection, which included:

• revocation of state awards,
• asset freezes,
• a ban on using radio frequencies,
• a ban on foreign vessels entering ports.

Additionally, Radyshevska underscored what she described as the politically motivated targeting of the opposition leader, raising further questions about the legitimacy of the measures. Her dissenting opinion thus brings to the forefront critical concerns about justice and procedural integrity in cases involving sanctions and political activity.

This situation reflects growing tensions between Ukraine’s political leaders and the resulting legal fallout. Radyshevska’s dissent could carry weight in future court proceedings on similar matters, as it highlights the need for thorough analysis and adherence to due process when imposing sanctions. The issue is significant not only for individual politicians but also for Ukraine’s broader legal system, potentially affecting public trust in the judiciary and its rulings.