Reporting the offense against Petro Poroshenko as a misdemeanor police tries to hush up the case, argued the lawyer, pointing out the situation comes in stark contrast to criminal cases filed against Andriy Antonenko, Sophiya Fedyna, and Marusya Zvirobiy.

“Now it is a different story. The man commits an assault and is released. They have been hiding him in the police [station]. We have just been told, no charges filed, they have done nothing.  The person has been summoned to appear in court tomorrow  for formal charges. Will it happen or not, it is a gamble,’ added Golovan.

He put into question police decision to report the offense as a misdemeanor.

It will be clear for any regular lawyer that the attack posed a threat to life and health of the Ukrainian opposition leader  and it happened in connection to his political activities,  stressed Poroshenko’s lawyer, assuming it should be qualified as a violence against  a statesman under art.346 of Ukraine’s Criminal Code.

He also added there is evidence the attacker ‘had at least three accomplices who were coordinating [their actions].’

Golovan claimed the offense targeting the opposition leader was ‘ordered by high-level state officials’ and pointed out National police interfered with the march initial course last-minute to  block some streets  making possible the attack.

Handling of the case also drew criticism from former SBU senior Viktor Kononenko who witnessed the offense  against Poroshenko first-hand. He claimed police ignored his witness statement.

Kononenko said  Kyiv Pechersk police department  investigator admitted off-the-record the case should be qualified as a felony.

Kononenko alleged that with no measures of restraint and  formal charges the suspect, to avoid trial,  can flee to Russia where he has relatives, and ‘this is what our state officials probably want’.