Director General of Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra National Reserve Maksym Ostapenko and the reserve's attorney Ivan Prokopenko allege that representatives of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) to drag out the appeals process in the case brought by the Holy Dormition Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra of the UOC (MP) regarding the illegality of the unilateral termination of the lease agreement.
"Today we saw once again how representatives of the UOC, who have been involved in this case since 2023, abuse their authority, mislead the court and the public, and do everything in their power to prevent the court from reaching a lawful decision. Today's hearing was a classic one, marking the third anniversary of the start of this case. Therefore, of course, it is very sad to see that in the third year of the war, when the Lavra is already under direct attack by Russia, there is still no court ruling on the legality of the first-instance decision regarding the return of the Assumption Cathedral to state use," Ostapenko told Interfax-Ukraine news agency after Wednesday's court session.
He also said at every court hearing, the Lavra faces provocations from representatives of the Moscow Patriarchate.
"At the same time, they are completely abusing the Ukrainian judicial system and, in general, the rights they possess," Ostapenko added.
When asked what would happen if the appellate court ruled in favor of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate), the director general noted that in that case: "Pavlo "Mercedes" will continue to hold services at the Assumption Cathedral."
The reserve's attorney Prokopenko said that in his opinion, the motion to recuse the panel of judges on Wednesday was filed by the UOC (MP) with the aim of dragging out the proceedings so that the court would proceed to the stage of ruling on this motion and spend its time on it.
"And subsequently – as indeed happened – we never actually heard the arguments from the parties to the case. Thus, today's hearing, which lasted nearly two hours, yielded no results and did not advance the case in any way. This has been going on for more than three years – that is, since January 24, 2024, when, by a court order, we moved to the stage of considering the case on its merits; in these three years, we have never once heard the case on its merits. And the reason it hasn't been heard is precisely because dozens of motions are filed at every hearing – whether to recuse the judges, to postpone the hearing because one of the attorneys was unable to attend, or for any other reason," the reserve's attorney said.
For his part, the attorney for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) Nikita Chekman noted on his Telegram channel that the motions to recuse the panel of judges were filed because the court allegedly committed gross procedural violations, in particular by failing to notify the monks – third parties in the case – about the hearing but continuing to hear the case nonetheless.
As previously reported, on March 29, 2023, the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra National Reserve terminated its lease agreement with the Holy Dormition Monastery of the UOC (MP).
On the same day, Kyiv Commercial Court opened proceedings on a lawsuit filed by the Holy Dormition Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra of the UOC (MP) against Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra Reserve regarding the unlawful termination of the lease agreement, while the UOC (MP) itself stated that it had no intention of vacating the Lavra until the conclusion of the court proceedings.
On August 9, 2023, the court ruled that the termination of the agreement between the UOC (MP) monastery and Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra Reserve was lawful. The legal battle has moved to the appellate court and has been ongoing for three years.
In April 2026, the general director of the national reserve, Ostapenko, stated that there are at least 140 monks, novices, and representatives of the UOC (MP) on the grounds of Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra, but their eviction is possible only by a court decision, which is still pending.
On August 26, the Northern Commercial Court of Appeals once again postponed (until September 29) the hearing on the merits of the appeal regarding the illegality of the unilateral termination of the lease agreement.
