On 21 April 2025 the Dnipro Court of Appeal heard the defence lawyers’ appeals against the ruling of the Sloviansk City District Court of the Donetsk Region of 27 March 2025. That ruling extended the custody of the accused, Metropolitan Arseniy, by 60 days, to 25 May 2025 inclusive, without setting bail. The appeals were not granted and the ruling was left unchanged, the Sloviansk court’s ruling of 23 May 2025 states, citing the appeal court’s decision in case No. 11-kp/803/1630/25.
The hearing was reported on its own website by the Svyatogirsk Holy Dormition Lavra, whose superior is Metropolitan Arseniy, and the substance of that report was relayed by the Sloviansk city website 6262. In their account the lawyers presented evidence that the prosecutors’ authority was doubtful and arguments in favour of a measure not involving detention, and the panel of judges agreed with the prosecution’s position.
In the same account, it became known during the hearing that one of the Metropolitan’s sureties, a member of parliament, had died; another surety, also a member of parliament, announced it. The next hearing of the Sloviansk court was set for 6 May 2025.
In April 2025 the Sloviansk City District Court was hearing case No. 243/4706/24, in which the Metropolitan is accused under part 2 of Article 114-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (6262 describes the charge as unauthorised dissemination of information about the location of Ukraine’s Armed Forces); he had been in custody since April 2024.
Sources: Sloviansk City District Court of the Donetsk Region, ruling of 23 May 2025 in case No. 243/4706/24 (copy in the YouControl catalogue); the same court, ruling of 27 March 2025 (copy in the YouControl catalogue); Svyatogirsk Holy Dormition Lavra, 25 April 2025; 6262, 26 April 2025; Vilne Radio, 1 April 2025.
Correction, 2 October 2026. These two sentences previously gave “in their account” two details that appear only in the Lavra’s report, not in both sources: which prosecutors the doubts concerned, and that the deputy who died was among those who had offered to stand surety for the Metropolitan. 6262 writes only of doubts about the prosecutors’ authority in the case and of the death of one of the sureties. The sentences now keep only what both reports say.
