KIEV, September 6. /TASS/. Former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich has been charged with the takeover of power in 2010, the country’s Prosecutor-General Yuri Lutsenko wrote on his Facebook page on Wednesday.
"Given the collected evidence, we report on a suspicion in line with Article 109.1 of Ukraine’s Criminal Court that ex-president Yanukovich and former justice minister (Alexander) Lavrinovich seized power jointly with other persons," Lutsenko said.
The Ukrainian prosecutors are investigating the constitutional coup in 2010, which "led to the takeover of state power by broadening the powers of Ukraine’s president in an unconstitutional way by limiting the roles and powers of the parliament and the government," he said.
- Yanukovich’s lawyer slams ruling on ex-Ukrainian leader’s trial in absentia as unlawful
- Yanukovich to appeal to European Court of Human Rights against Ukraine
- State-run Ukrainian bank launches seizure of ex-president Yanukovich’s assets
- Yanukovich blasts ‘Maidan’ extremists for sparking war in eastern Ukraine
- Ukrainian court confiscates Yanukovich’s property from presidential residence
According to the investigators, the constitutional amendments were unlawful.
After the coup d’etat in Ukraine in 2014, several charges have been pressed against Yanukovich. A case on high treason is already heard by the Obolonsky district court in Kiev. On Wednesday, the court adjourned the hearing until September 21 to let Yanukovich’s new lawyer Maxim Gerasko familiarize himself with the case files.
In comments to the latest charges, Lavrinovich said they have no legal grounds. "They just need a new criminal case against Yanukovich, and to justify this somehow, the charges have been pressed against a minister who just held his office and his work was just technical," Lavrinovich told 112 Channel.
The former minister stressed that the charges of takeover of power are inconsistent as in 2010 the Constitutional Court reinstated the presidential-parliamentary system in the country, returning to the president some powers that he lost after the 2004 constitutional reform.
"How can there be any questions regarding the violations of legislation in this case if the entire procedure of adopting new constitutional amendments was observed," he said. "Then, the Constitutional Court found that the law that introduced changes to the main law in December 2004 was unconstitutional."