ISSN 2663-0583 (Online)
ISSN 2663-0575 (Print)
  • Home
  • Establishing Trust in the Court in Ukraine as a Strategic Task for Judicial Reform
"

Establishing Trust in the Court in Ukraine as a Strategic Task for Judicial Reform

Summary: 1. Introduction. – 2. – Stages of Reform. – 3. International Standards and Recommendations. – 4. The Practice of the ECtHR. – 5. Evaluation of International Institutions. – 6. The National Dimension. – 7. Jury Trial. – 8. Independence of Judges vs Abuse of Power. – 9. Reform Strategy. – 10. Conclusions.

Full Text:

DOI

Abstract About Author(s) References Reviews

Abstract

This article highlights the key conclusions of international and national sociological research and observations on the current state of the judicial system of Ukraine. It analyses the achievements and failures at the main stages of the implemented judicial reform and highlights the importance of standards and recommendations for the proper organisation and functioning of the judiciary.
Particular attention is paid to the conclusions of the ECtHR, which enshrine legal positions on issues that are essential for the implementation of effective justice: the inadmissibility of the use of independence guarantees of judges to avoid legal liability; the need to improve the institution of the jury; and balanced and strategic planning of further reforms in the field of justice.

About Authors

Stefanchuk Maryna 

Dr. Sc. (Law), Assoc. Prof., Law School,
Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine 


Hladun Oleksandr 

PhD (Law), Senior Research Fellow, Secretariat of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine 


Stefanchuk Ruslan 

Dr. Sc. (Law), Academic of
The National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine 

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 

The authors declare no conflict of interest of relevance to this topic. Although one of the author serves at same institution as one of the editors of AJEE, which may cause a potential conflict or the perception of bias, the final decisions for the publication of this article was handled by the editors, including choice of peer reviewers, and Editorial Board Members, who are not affiliated to the same institution. 


DISCLAIMER 

The authors declare that they were not involved in the analysed law drafts during their collaboration with the legislative body. 


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the reviewers and editors of the Journal and to the English editor, Sarah White

References

  1. Law of Ukraine No 1402-VIII ‘On the Judiciary and Status of Judges’ of 2 June 2016 <https:// zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1402-19> accessed 10 April 2021.
  2. Law of Ukraine No 193-IX ‘On Amendments to the Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges” and Some Laws of Ukraine on the Activities of Judicial Authorities’ of 16 October 2019 <https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/193-20> accessed 10 April 2021.
  3. Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine of 11 March 2020 No 4-p/2020 in case No 1-304/2019(7155/19) <https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v004p710-20> accessed 10 April 2021.
  4. Law of Ukraine No 679-IX ‘On Amendments to the Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges” on the Travel of Judges and Settlement of Other Issues of Ensuring the Functioning of the Justice System in the Absence of the Plenipotentiary Composition of the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine’ of 4 June 2020 <https://zakon.rada. gov.ua/rada/show/679-20> accessed 10 April 2021.
  5. Draft Law ‘On Amendments to the Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges” and Some Laws of Ukraine on the Resumption of Work of the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine’ register No 3711-д of 29 January 2021 <http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/ zweb2/webproc4_1?pf3511=70949> accessed 10 April 2021.
  6. Law of Ukraine No 113– IX of 19 September 2019 ‘On Amendments to Some Legislative Acts of Ukraine on Priority Measures for Reform of Prosecutor’s Bodies’ <https://zakon.rada.gov. ua/laws/show/113-20> accessed 10 April 2021.
  7. Draft Law ‘On Amendments to Certain Laws of Ukraine on Improving the Selection and Training of Prosecutors’, register No 5158 of 25 February 2021 <http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/ pls/zweb2/webproc4_1?pf3511=71239> accessed 10 April 2021.
  8. Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies of 2 June 2020 <https://mof.gov.ua/uk/ memorandum_of_economic_and_financial_policies_by_the_authorities_of_ukraine-435> accessed 10 April 2021.
  9. Draft Law‘On Amendments to Certain Laws of Ukraine Concerning the Procedure for Election (Appointment) to the Positions of Members of the High Council of Justice and Activities of Disciplinary Inspectors of the High Council of Justice’, register No 5068 of 15 February 2021 <http://w1.c1.rada.gov.ua/pls/zweb2/webproc4_1?pf3511=71089> accessed 10 April 2021.
  10. Thebeginningofanewpoliticalyear:Trustinsocialinstitutions(July2020)<https://razumkov. org.ua/napriamky/sotsiologichni-doslidzhennia/pochatok-novogo-politychnogo-roku- dovira-do-sotsialnykh-instytutiv-lypen-2020r> accessed 10 April 2021.
  11. Thebeginningofanewpoliticalyear:Trustinsocialinstitutions(July2020)<https://razumkov. org.ua/napriamky/sotsiologichni-doslidzhennia/pochatok-novogo-politychnogo-roku- dovira-do-sotsialnykh-instytutiv-lypen-2020r> accessed 10 April 2021.
  12. Law of Ukraine No 398-95 ‘On Ukraine’s Accession to the Statute of the Council of Europe’ of 31 October 1995 <https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/398/95-%D0%B2%D1%80> accessed 10 April 2021.
  13. Opinion 190 (1995) Application by Ukraine for membership of the Council of Europe <https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=13929&lang=en> accessed 10 April 2021.
  14. RecommendationCM/Rec(2010)12‘Judges:Independence,EfficiencyandResponsibilities’ adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 17 November 2010 at the 1098th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies and explanatory memorandum <https://rm.coe.int/cmrec- 2010-12-on-independence-efficiency-responsibilites-of-judges/16809f007d> accessed 10 April 2021.
  15. Venice Commission, ‘Report on the Independence of the Judicial System Part I: The Independence of Judges’ adopted at 82nd Plenary Session (Venice, 12-13 March 2010). CDL-AD(2010)004-e <https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL- AD(2010)004-e> accessed 10 April 2021.
  16. Recommendation Rec (2000)19 ‘On the Role of Public Prosecution in the Criminal Justice System’ adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 6 October 2000 and Explanatory Memorandum <https://rm.coe.int/16804be55a> accessed 10 April 2021.
  17. Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1604 (2003) (Reply adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 4 February 2004 at the 870th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies) ‘Role of the Public Prosecutor’s Office in a Democratic Society Governed by the Rule of Law CM/AS (2004). Rec 1604 final 6 February 2004 –<https://rm.coe.int/16805dde1c> accessed 10 April 2021.
  18. Recommendation CM/Rec (2012)11 of the Committee of Ministers to member states ‘Role of Public Prosecutors outside the Criminal Justice System’ adopted by the Committee of 
  19. Venice Commission, ‘Report on European Standards as regards the Independence of the Judicial System: Part II - the Prosecution Service’ adopted at 85th plenary session (Venice, 17-18 December 2010). CDL-AD(2010)040-e <https://www.venice.coe.int/ webforms/documents/default.aspx?ref=cdl-ad(2010)040&lang=EN> accessed 10 April 2021.
  20. ‘Magna Carta of Judges (Fundamental Principles)’ CCJE (2010)3 Final. Strasbourg, 17 November 2010 <https://rm.coe.int/2010-ccje-magna-carta-anglais/168063e431> accessed 10 April 2021.
  21. Kavakin AO (ed), Documents of the Consultative Council of European Judges (3rd ed, Ratio Decidendi Publishing House 2020).
  22. ‘Opinions of the Consultative Council of European Prosecutors’ <https://rm.coe.int/ compilation-of-opinions-of-the-consultative-council-of-european-prosec/168074fa32> accessed 10 April 2021.
  23. Venice Commission, ‘Opinion on the Legal Framework in Ukraine Governing the Supreme Court and Judicial Self-governing Bodies’CDL-AD (2019)027-e, adopted at the 121st Plenary Session (6-7 December 2019) <https://venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL- AD(2019)027-e> accessed 10 April 2021.
  24. Venice Commission, ‘Joint Opinion of the Venice Commission and the Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law (DGI) of the Council of Europe on the draft amendments to the Law “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges” and certain Laws on the activities of the Supreme Court and Judicial Authorities (draft Law no 3711)’ CDL-AD(2020)022-e Ukraine, adopted at the 124th online Plenary Session (8-9 October 2020) <https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2020)022-e> accessed 10 April 2021.
  25. Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v Ukraine App no 40450/04 (ECtHR, 15 October 2009) <http:// hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-95032> accessed 10 April 2021.
  26. Burmych and Others v Ukraine App no 46852/13 (ECtHR, 12 October 2017) para 155 <http:// hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-178082> accessed 10 April 2021.
  27. Council of Europe European Commission for the efficiency of justice (CEPEJ) <https://www. coe.int/en/web/cepej/home> accessed 10 April 2021.
  28. Report on the Independence of the Judicial System Part I: The Independence of Judges adopted by the Venice Commission at its 82nd Plenary Session (Venice, 12-13 March 2010). CDL-AD(2010)004-e <https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL- AD(2010)004-e> accessed 10 April 2021.
  29. Evaluation of Judicial Systems <https://www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/cepej-work/evaluation- of-judicial-systems> accessed 10 April 2021.
  30. Doing Business: Measuring Business Regulations. The World Bank <https://www. doingbusiness.org/en/data/exploretopics/enforcing-contracts> accessed 10 April 2021.
  31. Opinion No 12 (2009) of the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) and Opinion No 4 (2009) of the Consultative Council of European Prosecutors (CCPE) to the attention of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe ‘On the Relations between Judges and Prosecutors in a Democratic Society’ <https://rm.coe.int/1680747391 https://rm.coe.int/ opinion-no-12-2009-on-the-relations-between-judges-and-prosecutors-in-/16806a1fbd> accessed 10 April 2021.
     
  32. Public opinion in the European Union. Standard Eurobarometer 93 (Summer 2020) <https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/ResultDoc/download/ DocumentKy/91061> accessed 10 April 2021.
  33. The 2020 EU Justice Scoreboard. European Commission <https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/ info/files/justice_scoreboard_2020_en.pdf> accessed 21 June 2021.
  34. 2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Ukraine. United States Department of State. Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor <https://www.state.gov/ reports/2020-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/ukraine> accessed 10 April 2021.
  35. O Razumkov’s Ukrainian Center for Economic and Political Studies, ‘Report on the results of the study “Attitudes of Ukrainian citizens to the judiciary”’ (Kyiv, 2020) <https://rm.coe.int/ zvitsud2020/1680a0c2d7> accessed 10 April 2021.
  36. Bratushchak A, ‘Someone is snoring. How the media cover the work of the courts’ <https://imi.org.ua/monitorings/htos-hrope-yak-media-vysvitlyuyut-robotu-sudiv- i38178?fbclid=IwAR1nQAWFum_AJ4yJLqriVzVmFtaEmX-7CY1ZQND6X0blgBIeJL- 1WoFejwA> accessed 10 April 2021.
  37. Sociological Group Rating, ‘Ukraine in quarantine: Monitoring of public sentiment’ (March 26-28, 2021) <http://ratinggroup.ua/research/ukraine/ukraina_na_karantine_ poryadok_i_bezopasnost_26-28_marta_2021.html?fbclid=IwAR0yg9dLHEbwZgCP6Au5s TTEYb4sKw8nP4ksyGoufudCDNTrM6NxbFulbz0> accessed 10 April 2021.
  38. State Judicial Administration of Ukraine, ‘Report of local general courts on consideration of court cases for 2020’ <https://court.gov.ua/inshe/sudova_statystyka/IV_kvartal_20> accessed 10 April 2021.
  39. Myshchak I, ‘Reforming the jury in Ukraine as an important element in increasing public confidence in the judiciary’ (2020) 18-19 (203-204) Public opinion on lawmaking 15–20 <http://nbuviap.gov.ua/images/dumka/2020/18-19.pdf> accessed 10 April 2021.
  40. Recommendations of joint committee hearings in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine committees on law enforcement and legal policy on the topic ‘Prospects for development, issues of formation and functioning of the jury in Ukraine’, approved by the decision of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Law Enforcement (protocol No 37 of 01 July 2020) <http:// komzakonpr.rada.gov.ua/uploads/documents/32665.pdf> accessed 10 April 2021.
  41. Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine of 27 October 2020 No 13-p/2020 in case No 1-24/2020(393/20) <https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/rada/show/v013p710-20> accessed 10 April 2021.
  42. Xhoxhaj v Albania App no 15227/19 (ECtHR, 9 February 2021) paras 299-300 <http://hudoc. echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-208053> accessed 10 April 2021.
  43. Strategy for reforming the judiciary, the jurisdiction and related legal institutions for 2015- 2020: Approved by the Decree of the President of Ukraine of 20 May 2015 No 276/2015 <https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/276/2015> accessed 10 April 2021.

Reviews for article

Add a Review

Reviews are moderated and will be published after verification!
All comments not related to reviews of the article will be deleted!

 

Keywords

  • judicial reform, virtue, rule of law, judiciary, public trust, independence of judges, international standards

How to cite it?

  • M Stefanchuk, O Hladun, R Stefanchuk, ‘Establishing Trust in the Court in Ukraine as a Strategic Task for Judicial Reform’ 2021 3(11) Access to Justice in Eastern Europe 101–116. DOI: 10.33327/AJEE-18-4.3-n000073