--- title: "The Court as Prosecutor: International Observers Record Violation of Impartiality Principles by the High Anti-Corruption Court in the 'Rotterdam+' Case" description: "🚨 International observers (IAC ISHR) have recorded a violation of impartiality principles in the 'Rotterdam+' case. The HACC judge, according to experts, effectively assumed the role of the prosecutor, eliminating deficiencies in the prosecution's position. The defense pointed out contradictions in the evidence and instability in the prosecution's stance. The case, ongoing since 2017, once again raises questions about the independence of Ukrainian justice. #Rotterdam #HACC #Justice #Ukraine" date: 2026-08-12T09:56:00.000Z lang: en url: https://xab.info/en/posts/court-as-prosecutor-violation-of-impartiality-hacc-rotterdam-case tags: [rotterdam-plus, vaks, ukraine-justice, corruption, ishr, fair-trial] publisher: "XAB.info" --- # The Court as Prosecutor: International Observers Record Violation of Impartiality Principles by the High Anti-Corruption Court in the 'Rotterdam+' Case ![Sign of the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) on the building facade, symbolizing the trial in the 'Rotterdam+' case and criticism of its impartiality](https://xab.info/media/2026/08/12/sud-kak-obvinitel-narushenie-bespristrastnosti-vaks-delom-rotterdam/sud-kak-obvinitel-narushenie-bespristrastnosti-vaks-delom-rotterdam-1.webp) ## 🎯 Key Points - The IAC ISHR monitoring mission recorded a violation of adversarial principles in the 'Rotterdam+' case. - According to observers, the HACC judge actively eliminated deficiencies in the prosecution's position. - The defense pointed out the lack of identification data in protocols and contradictions in the prosecutor's testimony. - The case has been under investigation since 2017 and was closed five times, creating a 'vicious circle' effect. On August 12, 2026, nearly a decade after the investigation into the high-profile 'Rotterdam+' case began, the international community's attention is once again focused on the proceedings at the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC). Following a hearing held on July 23, the monitoring mission of the International Association of Lawyers (IAC ISHR) published an alarming report. Experts have recorded actions by the judge that, in their view, indicate a gross violation of fundamental principles of justice: adversarial proceedings, equality of arms, and impartiality. ### The Judge Assumes the Role of the Prosecutor The key moment that drew criticism from observers was the behavior of the presiding judge during the examination of documentary evidence. According to the report, when the defense denied certain facts or interpretations of evidence, the judge did not limit herself to the role of an arbiter but independently expressed her own understanding of the prosecution's logic. The IAC ISHR mission notes that such actions can be objectively perceived as an attempt by the court to remedy deficiencies in the prosecution's position. "Any actions by the court that can be objectively perceived as aimed at eliminating deficiencies in the prosecution's version are capable of creating an impression of a violation of the principles of adversarial proceedings," the observers' conclusion states. Lawyers emphasize: the burden of proof lies exclusively with the prosecution, and all doubts must be interpreted in favor of the accused, not "proven" by the judge. ### ECtHR Precedents and Procedural Imbalance The mission's report cites precedents from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). In particular, it mentions the case of UAB Ambercore DC and UAB Arcus Novus v. Lithuania, where the court emphasized that Article 6 Β§ 1 of the Convention guarantees each party the right to conditions that do not create a significant procedural imbalance. Observers point out that the judge's active stance in the 'Rotterdam+' case effectively deprives the defense of the ability to effectively present its position, as the court begins to work in the interests of the prosecution. ### Contradictory Data During the hearing, the defense also pointed out significant contradictions in the prosecution's position. In particular, the meeting protocol provided by the prosecutor did not contain proper identification details, casting doubt on its authenticity. Furthermore, the cost of coal in the documents was calculated using incomparable indicators, making an objective assessment of the damage impossible. The defense also noted that the prosecutor's current explanations contradict his previous statements, creating an impression of instability in the prosecution's version. ### The Vicious Circle Effect: The History of the Case The 'Rotterdam+' case has become a symbol of a prolonged and contradictory investigation. Started in March 2017, it was closed by the prosecution five times over nearly a decade due to the absence of a crime, only to be reopened. In October 2023, the HACC decided to close the case, but in December of the same year, the Court of Appeal overturned this decision, returning the process to the stage of substantive consideration. Lawyers call this the "vicious circle effect," where the process does not move towards a conclusion but cyclically repeats stages, undermining trust in the justice system. ### Risks for the Reputation of Ukrainian Justice The events of July 23 and subsequent comments by international observers create serious risks for the reputation of the Ukrainian judicial system on the international arena. In conditions where Ukraine strives for integration into European structures, such violations of basic legal principles can be used as an argument against the effectiveness of anti-corruption institutions. If the trend of mixing the roles of the court and the prosecution continues, it could lead to the annulment of ECtHR decisions and further isolation of Ukrainian justice. ## πŸ” Fact-Check Verification - [International observers recorded HACC violation of impartiality principles in the case...](https://www.unian.net/society/mezhdunarodnye-nablyudateli-zafiksirovali-narushenie-vaks-principov-bespristrastnosti-v-dele-rotterdam-13467663.html) - ΠŸΠΎΠ΄Ρ‚Π²Π΅Ρ€ΠΆΠ΄Π°Π΅Ρ‚ ΠΎΡ‚Ρ‡Π΅Ρ‚ IAC ISHR ΠΎ Π½Π°Ρ€ΡƒΡˆΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡΡ… Π½Π° засСдании 23 июля. - [HACC decision on the 'Rotterdam+' case: lawyer stated risks for court impartiality](https://www.rbc.ua/ukr/news/rishennya-vaks-spravi-rotterdam-yuristka-1777483109.html) - Π”Π΅Ρ‚Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡ€ΡƒΠ΅Ρ‚ ΠΏΠΎΠ·ΠΈΡ†ΠΈΡŽ Π·Π°Ρ‰ΠΈΡ‚Ρ‹ ΠΈ ΠΊΡ€ΠΈΡ‚ΠΈΠΊΡƒ дСйствий ΡΡƒΠ΄ΡŒΠΈ. - [Procedural decisions by HACC on the 'Rotterdam+' case spark discussion on court impartiality...](https://www.obozrevatel.com/rozsliduvannya/protsessualnyie-resheniya-vaks-po-delu-rotterdam-vyizyivayut-diskussiyu-o-bespristrastnosti-suda-karpovets.htm) - ΠŸΠΎΠ΄Ρ‚Π²Π΅Ρ€ΠΆΠ΄Π΅Π½ΠΎ ΠΏΠΎ источнику obozrevatel.com - [Blog | 'Rotterdam+' Case: The Vicious Circle Effect](https://www.obozrevatel.com/rozsliduvannya/delo-rotterdam-effekt-zamknutogo-kruga.htm) - ΠŸΠΎΠ΄Ρ‚Π²Π΅Ρ€ΠΆΠ΄Π΅Π½ΠΎ ΠΏΠΎ источнику obozrevatel.com ## ❓ FAQ ### Q: What exactly did the HACC judge violate according to observers? **A:** The judge independently expressed her understanding of the evidence and the logic of the prosecution, which is perceived as eliminating deficiencies in the prosecution's position and violating the principle of impartiality. ### Q: How long has the 'Rotterdam+' case been under investigation? **A:** The investigation began in March 2017 and has been ongoing for more than 9 years, with five instances of the case being closed. ### Q: Who is the author of the report on violations? **A:** The report was prepared by the monitoring mission of the International Association of Lawyers (IAC ISHR).