Chernivtsi border guards detained a sole proprietor programmer at a distance of 30 km from the state border of Ukraine.
The case even went to court, and he allegedly had written explanations, where he explained that on March 08, 2024, he was traveling to the Chernivtsi region to cross the border with Romania with the help of an unknown person who promised to help him for $5500.
However, as they say, there was a «nuance».
Border guards from the «Control Post» detained a programmer and another person on the territory of the Khotyn UTC of the Dniester district of Chernivtsi region on the outskirts of the village of Ataki. The border was 30 km away.
They took statements from the men and sent the case to court. The programmer did not appear in court, although he was sent a message on Viber.
Having examined the case file and assessed the evidence provided to the court in their totality and interconnection, the court concludes that the programmer’s actions do not constitute an administrative offense.
«When considering a case on an administrative offense, the body (official) is obliged to find out whether an administrative offense was committed, whether the person is guilty of committing it, whether he or she is subject to administrative liability, whether there are circumstances mitigating and aggravating liability, whether property damage was caused, whether there are grounds for referring the materials on the administrative offense to a public organization, labor collective, and to find out other circumstances relevant to the correct resolution of the case», — the materials say.
It is noted that law enforcement officers did not provide evidence that the programmer crossed the border.
The case included written explanations from the programmer (in fact, a confession): in the written explanations, he explained that he was traveling to Chernivtsi region to cross the border with Romania with the help of an unknown person who promised to help him for $5500 euros.
However, the court noted that these explanations did not contain a signature that would certify the authenticity of this content. Accordingly, they could not be accepted as evidence, since after the essence of the explanation, it was not indicated whether they were provided by the person himself or selected by an authorized person of the border guard service.
Thus, the court fully acquitted the programmer and closed the case.