Andriy Yosipov, an attorney and partner at Baristers Law Firm, reports that a lawsuit has been filed on behalf of his client, Roman Chervinsky, to protect his honor, dignity, and business reputation. The corresponding complaint was filed with the Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv.

The basis for the lawsuit is the dissemination of false statements regarding the circumstances surrounding the events at the Kanatove airfield. Vasyl Malyuk, then head of the Security Service of Ukraine, made public accusations in an interview that not only grossly violate the constitutional principle of the presumption of innocence but also do not correspond to the actual facts.

In particular, the statements made branded the officer as a “deserter” and the culprit behind the tragic consequences of the enemy shelling, despite the fact that no court has issued a guilty verdict in these cases, and the order to transfer Chervinsky—which served as the basis for the allegations of failure to report for duty—was ruled unlawful by the court and revoked.

The lawsuit is filed directly against the Security Service of Ukraine. This choice of defendant is clearly justified, since Vasyl Malyuk, at the time of the interview, was not acting as a private individual but as the official head of the agency, disseminating information through the official communication channels of the SBU’s press service.

It is worth noting that Roman Chervinsky is a security and defense officer with many years of experience who has received numerous state awards and departmental honors, including the Orders of Bohdan Khmelnytsky and “For Courage,” as well as awards from the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense and the SBU itself.

Given his track record, such unsubstantiated statements by the leadership of the special service discredit not only Chervinsky personally. They cast a shadow and undermine the authority of his colleagues, combat officers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, and the entire intelligence community.

As of today, no proceedings have been opened in the case, but in this process, attorney A. Yosipov does not rule out procedural sabotage or artificial obstacles on the part of the court, in particular attempts to groundlessly return the complaint or to delay the proceedings under fabricated pretexts.