The Odessa Regional Prosecutor’s Office and the Odessa Regional Police Department Have Received a Proposal to Enter Into a Settlement Agreement in the “Ferry Case” (Press Release)
On 23 May 2026, advocate Dmytro Yagunov, acting in the interests of plaintiff Stoikova L.K. (civil case No. 522/1380/26, Prymorsky District Court of Odesa, Judge Bondar V.Ya.), acting on the plaintiff’s instructions, officially submitted to the Odesa Regional Prosecutor’s Office and the Main Directorate of the National Police (MDNP) in Odesa Oblast a proposal to conclude a settlement agreement.
SUBJECT OF THE DISPUTE
The subject of the civil case is compensation for non-pecuniary (moral) damage caused to the plaintiff as a result of the systematic and deliberate failure by the prosecutor’s office and the police to investigate the obvious criminal offenses related to the forgery of documents concerning the so-called “Ferry ‘Kyslytskyi’” (criminal proceeding No. 12017160150003076).
Two documents are forged: the “Vessel Technical Supervision Act” dated 15 November 2015, signed on behalf of Farvarshchuk V.D., who died in 2007, and the “Vessel Purchase and Sale Agreement” dated 14 February 2003, in which, according to the conclusion of a handwriting examination, there are no genuine signatures or authentic seal impressions whatsoever.
IRREFUTABLE PROOF OF FORGERY
The fact of forgery of both documents is confirmed by a body of officially established evidence, including: the death certificate of Farvarshchuk V.D. (series І-ЖД No. 108102 dated 11.07.2007); numerous letters from the State Enterprise “Classification Society — Register of Shipping of Ukraine” and the Shipping Administration; the conclusion of handwriting examination No. 365-П dated 12.11.2018; the Chornomorska District Prosecutor’s Office’s own letters dated 30.11.2021, 24.12.2021, 02.05.2023, and 03.05.2023, in which the prosecutor’s office itself acknowledged the forgery of both documents; decisions of the Ovidiopol District Court (2023–2026), the Odesa Court of Appeal (2023, 2025), and the Bolhrad District Court (2024); the prosecutor’s motion dated 06.02.2026 to close the criminal proceeding, which conclusively established the forgery as proven beyond doubt.
TERMS OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
The sole condition of the settlement agreement is the official acknowledgment by the Odesa Regional Prosecutor’s Office and the MDNP in Odesa Oblast, at a court hearing, of the fact that the aforementioned documents are forged. Upon fulfilment of this condition, the plaintiff withdraws all claims and signs the settlement agreement.
LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF REJECTING THE PROPOSAL
Should the proposal be rejected or no response be provided within 5 days of the date of receipt of the letter, the respondents — the Odesa Regional Prosecutor’s Office and the MDNP in Odesa Oblast, represented by their respective heads — will automatically have declared the position that: 1) the documents referred to above are not forged; 2) a biologically deceased person is capable of signing documents; and 3) a printed toner impression is legally equivalent to a genuine signature and an authentic seal impression.
Such a position will be documented and made available for public coverage in Ukrainian and international media, and will also be used in the context of relevant proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights.
BACKGROUND
For eight years, the prosecutor’s office and the police effectively allowed a situation in which a biologically deceased person was supposedly able to sign documents after their death. This anomaly was corrected only after the motion to close the criminal proceeding was filed. However, in court hearings in the civil case, the respondents’ representatives have continued to avoid unequivocal confirmation of the fact of forgery.
