ISSN 2663-0583 (Online)
ISSN 2663-0575 (Print)
  • Home
  • Lustration of Judges in Ukraine: National Insights and European Implications
"

Lustration of Judges in Ukraine: National Insights and European Implications

Summary: 1. Introduction. – 2. International Standards of Lustration of Judges: Basic Model and Ukrainian Perspectives. – 3. Lustration, Vetting, and Assessment of Judges: European Experience and Ukrainian Perspectives. – 4.  Lustration of Judges in Ukraine: Fundamental Challenges and Basic Results. – 5. Efficiency of Lustration: An Empirical Approach. – 6. Conclusions.

FULL TEXT

Full Text:

DOI
https://doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-3.4-a000037
CITATIONS
VIEWS
8 208
Abstract About Author(s) References Reviews

Abstract

This article primarily focuses on the Ukrainian judge lustration, analysed from diverse aspects. Ukraine's legal lustration framework engenders two legal acts— the Law On Restoring Trust into Judicial Power in Ukraine (2014) and the law On Purification of Government (2014). Social feedback on adopting these Laws, their key objectives, provided instruments and efficiency issues are discussed. This research particularly scrutinises the fundamental European lustration standards, referencing a few European countries' experiences: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Poland. Deep insight into national lustration procedures is given, considering the European Court of Human Rights' relevant rulings and the Ukrainian Constitution's provisions. Remarks on whether all lustration laws comply with the Ukrainian Constitution are offered. Addressing the High Council of Justice's precedents, a judicial body entitled to verify the judges' lustration results, an in-depth empirical analysis of those procedural results are provided. Overall, Ukrainian lustration embodies a unique phenomenon due to strong social demand formalized in specially designed regulation.

About Authors

References

  1. ‘Interv’u Golovy Verhovnogo Sudu Ukrainy Yaroslava Romaniuka – golovnomu redactorovi zurnalu “PravoUkrainy” Oleksandru Svyatozkomy’ [‘The Interview of the President of the Supreme Court of Ukraine Yaroslav Romaniuk to Oleksander Svyatozkiy, Chief Editor of the Journal “Pravo Ukrainy”’] (2014) 11 Pravo Ukrainy 14-73.
  2.  ‘Praktyka organiv konstytuziynoiy urysdykziiy ta Europeys’kogo Sudu z prav lyudyny z pytan’ lustrazii [‘Precedents of the Constitutional Courts and European Court of Human Rights on Issues of Lustration’] (2015) 3 Visnyk Konstytuziynogo Sudu Ukrainy 120-130.
  3. ‘The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-conflict Societies’ (Report of the UN Secretary General) [2004] UN S 616< https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/blog/document/the-rule-of-law-and-transitional-justice-in-conflict-and-post-conflict-societies-report-of-the-secretary-general/> accessed 25 October 2020. 
  4.  ‘Zvit Vyshoyi Rady ustytsyi za resultatamy diyal’nosti u 2016 rozi’ [‘Report of the High Council of Justice on Results of its Work in 2016’] (Official web-site of the High Council of Justice) <https://hcj.gov.ua/sites/default/files/field/file/zvit_2016.pdf > accessed 20 October 2020.
  5. 6 September 1985 and endorsed by General Assembly resolutions 40/32 of 29 November 1985 and 40/146 of 13 December 1985 <https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/independencejudiciary.aspx> accessed 25 October 2020.
  6. A Boyko, ‘Vidpovidalʹnistʹ slidchykh suddiv za porushennya norm protsesualʹnoho prava ta obovʺyazkiv suddi shchodo zakhystu prav lyudyny u protsesi ukhvalennya sudovoho rishennya pro zastosuvannya trymannya pid vartoyu shchodo uchasnykiv Revolyutsiyi hidnosti’ [‘The Responsibility of Investigating Judges for Violating the Procedural Law and the Judge's Obligations Regarding the Protection of Human Rights in the Process of Adopting Court Decisions on Detention of Participants of the Revolution of Dignity’] (2016) 1 Vysnyk Assoziatzii Slidchyh suddiv Ukrainy 15-20.
  7. A Lesko, ‘Problema vykonannya rishenʹ Yevropeysʹkoho sudu z prav lyudyny: neobkhidnistʹ systemnoho analizu ta vprovadzhennya’ [‘The Problem of Implementing of the European Court of Human Rights decisions: the Call for Complex Analysis and Implementation’] (Official web-site of the High Council of Justice, 23 November 2016) <http://www.vru.gov.ua/news/1880> accessed 10 October 2020.
  8. Adamsons v Latvia (App no 3669/03) ECHR 24 June 2008 <https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22dmdocnumber%22:[%22837061%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-87179%22]}> accessed 27 October 2020.
  9. All of the researched cases have been taken from the official web-sites of the High Council of Judges and the Higher Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine, where open registers of their decisions on imposing disciplinary sanctions on judges are placed (see <http://www.vru.gov.ua/act_list>; <https://vkksu.gov.ua/ua/rishiennia-komisii/rishiennia-komisii-za-2016/> accessed 30 October 2020).
  10.  B Grodsky, ’Beyond Lustration: Truth-Seeking Efforts in the Post-Communist Space’ (2009) 5(2), Taiwan Journal of Democracy 21-43.
  11.  B Maxhuni, U Cucchi, ‘An Analysis of the Vetting Process in Albania’(2017) 01 Policy Analysis <http://www.legalpoliticalstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/An-Analysis-of-the-Vetting-Process-in-Albania.pdf> accessed 25 October 2020.
  12.  Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, adopted by the Seventh United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders held at Milan from 26 August to 
  13. C Horne, ‘Lustration and Trust in Central and East Europe: Assessing the Impact of Lustration on Trust in Public Institutions and National Government’ (2012) 45(4) Comparative Political Studies1-37 < https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414011421766 > accessed 25 October 2020.
  14.  CEELI Institute, ‘Statement of Principles of the Independence of the Judiciary’ (Conference of Chief Justices of Central and Eastern Europe, 14 October 2015) , <http://ceeliinstitute.org/brijuni-statement/> accessed 20 October 2020.
  15. Consultative Council of European Judges, Opinion no 3 to the attention of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe ‘On the principles and rules governing judges’ professional conduct, in particular ethics, incompatible behavior and impartiality’ (The official web-site of the Consultative Council of European Judges, 19 November 2002) <https://rm.coe.int/16807475bb/> accessed 16 June 2020.
  16. Data about the quantity of judges in 2014 is taken from: ‘Dopovyd’ Golovy Verhovnogo Sudu Ukrainy Yaroslava Romaniuka na XIII z’izdi suddiv Ukrainy 12 lystopada 2015 roku’ [‘Report of the President of the Supreme Court of Ukraine at 13th national meeting of the judges of Ukraine, 12 November 2015’] (2015) Official web-site of the Supreme Court of Ukraine <http://www.scourt.gov.ua/clients/vsu/vsu.nsf/(print)/AD5F6A13882B688BC2257EFB00385AD7> accessed 25 October 2020; 
  17. Data about the quantity of judges, entitled to the lustration restrictions, is taken from: ‘Shchorichna dopovyd za 2017 rik “Pro stan zabezpechennya nezaleznosty suddiv v Ukraini, zatverdzhena rishennyan Vyshchoiy rady pravosuddia vid” 13 liutogo 2018 roku No 463/0/15-18’ [‘2017 Report “On the Situation with Judicial Independence in Ukraine”, adopted by the decision of the High Council of Justice on 13 February 2018, No 463/0/15-18’], (2018) Official web-site of the High Council of Justice <http://www.vru.gov.ua/add_text/26> accessed 25 October 2020.
  18. Decision (n 96); Ruling of the Supreme Court Grand Chamber in the proceedings No 800/186/17 of 31 January 2019 (Official web-site of the Supreme Court) <http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/76822787> accessed 20 October 2020.
  19. Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia of 14 July 1994 cited by ‘Praktyka orhaniv konstytutsiynoyiy urysdyktsiyi ta Yevropeysʹkoho sudu z prav lyudyny z pytanʹ lyustratsiyi (prodovzhennya)’ [‘Precedents of Courts of Constitutional Jurisdiction and the European Court of Human Rights on Lustration (Continued)’] (2015) 3 Vysnyk Konstytuyziynogo Sudu Ukrainy (2015) 120-130.
  20.  Decision of the Council of Judges of Ukraine No 23 ‘Pro stan vykonannya suddyamy ta sudamy Ukrayiny Zakonu “Pro ochyshchennya vlady”’ [‘On results of fulfillment of the Law of Ukraine “On Purification of Government” by the Judges of Ukraine’] (Official web-site of the Council of Judges of Ukraine, 3 March 2016) , <https://court.gov.ua/userfiles/file/DSA/2018_DSA_docs/ZVIT_RSU.pdf> accessed 20 October 2020.
  21. E Zaharov, ‘Zakon pro lyustratsiyu peredbachaye zvilʹnennya ponad pivmilʹyona derzh sluzhbovtsiv’ [‘The law on Lustration Demands Dismissal of More than Half a Million of Civil Servants’] (iPressUA, 30 September 2014) <http://ipress.ua/news/zakon_pro_lyustratsiyu_peredbachaie_zvilnennya_ponad_pivmilyona_derzhsluzhbovtsiv__pravozahysnyk_87582.html> accessed 15 October 2020; Zaharov (n 67).
  22. ES Mark, ‘Purging the Past: the Current State of Lustration Laws in the Former Communist Bloc’ (1996) 59(4) Law and Contemporary Problems 181-196.
  23. Ivanovski v ‘The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’ (App no 29908/11) ECHR 9 May 2011 < https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-115519%22]}> accessed 25 October 2020.
  24. Judicial Reform in Georgia’ (Official web-site of the High Council of Justice of Georgia) <http://hcoj.gov.ge/en/reforms/judicial-reform> accessed 29 October 2020; N Kalandadze, ‘Judicial Reform in Georgia’ (2007) 9 (20) CACI Analyst <https://www.cacianalyst.org/publications/field-reports/item/11485-field-reports-caci-analyst-2007-9-20-art-11485.html> accessed 30 October 2020; ‘Reform in Georgia’ (Policy Paper by the Administration of the Government of Georgia, October 2015) <http://gov.ge/files/288_52140_166496_20151026ReformsinGeorgia.pdf> accessed 30 October 2020.
  25. K Loewenstein, ‘Militant Democracy and Fundamental Rights, I’ (1937) 31(3) The American Political Science Review 417–432; 
  26. K Loewenstein, ‘Militant Democracy and Fundamental Rights, II’ (1937) 31(4) The American Political Science Review 638–658; 
  27. Khlabystova (n 38) 140-152; V Goshovskiy, ‘The Genesis of Lustration in the World and its Significance for the Development of the Law-Based Society’ (2017) 1 Legea Si Viata 33-37 <http://www.legeasiviata.in.ua/archive/2017/1-2/9.pdf> accessed 20 October 2020.
  28. Konstytutsiya Ukrayiny, adopted on 28 June 1996, with further amendments [The Constitution of Ukraine] (Official web-site of the Parliament of Ukraine) <http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/254%D0%BA/96-%D0%B2%D1%80> accessed 10 October 2020.
  29.  L Hryshko, ‘Provalena reforma, abo dorohyy revansh militsioneriv’ [‘Failure to Reform, or Expensive Revenge of Ex-policemen’] (Deutsche Welle, 9 November 2017) <https://www.dw.com/ukB2/a-41312321> accessed 30 October 2020; Report of the Ministry of Justice (n 97).
  30. L Vynogradova, ‘Urydychna vidpovidalnist suddiv zahalnyh sudiv Ukrainy’ [‘Judicial Liability of Judges of Courts of General Jurisdiction of Ukraine’]( Candidate of Law thesis, Odessa Law Academy2004). 
  31. Martzelyak et al (n 52) 259.
  32.  Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, Report ‘On results of the Collection and Processing of the information on implementation of the Law of Ukraine “On Purification of Power” for 2 years, elaborated by Department of Lustration of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine’ (Official web-site of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, October 2016) , <http://lustration.minjust.gov.ua/main/work_material> accessed 10 October 2020.
  33.  N Chengich, ‘Mekhanizmy pravosuddya perekhidnoho periodu ta pravalyudyny v konfliktnykh i postkonfliktnykh sytuatsiyakh’ [‘Mechanisms of Transitional Justice and Human Rights in Conflict and Post-conflict Situations’] (Sarajevo, 5-13 December 2015) <https://helsinki.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Kryminalne-peresliduvannya-vojennyh-zlochyntsiv.pdf> accessed 25 October 2020. 
  34. O Busol, ‘“Pro vidnovlennia doviry do sudovoi systemy” ne ye zakonom pro liustratsiiu ta potrebuie doopratsiuvannia’ [‘“On Restoring Trust into Judicial Power in Ukraine” is not a Law on lustration and needs to be improved’], (2014) 8 Hromadska dumka pro pravotvorennia 11–20.
  35.  O Martzelyak, M Pogoretsky, S Prilutskiy, ‘Naukovo-pravovyy vysnovok shchodo pytanʹ vidpovidalʹnosti suddiv u konteksti vidpovidnosti konstytutsiyi ukrayiny polozhenʹ punktu 6 chastyny pershoyi, punktiv 2, 13 chastyny druhoyi, chastyny tretʹoyi statti 3 Zakonu Ukrayiny “Pro ochyshchennya vlady” No 1682-vii’ [‘Scientific Opinion on Issues of Liability Of Judges in the Context of the Constitutionality of paragraph 6 of part one, paragraphs 2, 13 of part two, part three of Article 3 of the Law of Ukraine “On Purification of Government” No 1682-VII”] (2015) 2 Visnyk Kryminalnogo Sudochynstva 249-263<http://vkslaw.knu.ua/images/verstka/2_2015_Na_dopomogu_yrustam_1.pdf> accessed 27 October 2020.
  36.  O Nechytaylo,’“Skasuvannya sudom deyakykh rishenʹ VRYU shchodo zvilʹnennya suddiv gruntuyetʹsya na nedotrymanni strokiv prytyahnennya do dystsyplinarnoyi vidpovidalʹnosti’ [‘The Annulment by the Court of Some Decisions of the HCJ on the Dismissal of Judges is Based on Failure to Comply with the Terms of Disciplinary Proceedings’] (Official web-site of the Higher Administrative Court of Ukraine, 1 March 2016) <http://www.vasu.gov.ua/123567/> accessed 20 October 2020.
  37. Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Opinion No 190 (1995) ‘Application by Ukraine for Membership of the Council of Europe’ (The official web-site of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe) <http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=13929&lang=en> accessed 20 October 2020. 
  38. Polyakh and Others v Ukraine (App No 58812/15 and 4 others) ECHR 17 October 2019 < https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-196607%22]}> accessed 30 October 2020.
  39. R David, ‘In Exchange for Truth: The Polish Lustrations and the South African Amnesty Process’ (2006) 33 (1) Politikon 81–99.
  40. R David, ‘Lyustratsiya v Ukrayini ta yevropeysʹki standarty: formuvannya demokratiyi, spromozhnoyi sebe zakhystyty’ [‘Lustration in Ukraine and European Standards: Formation Of Democracy, Capable of Defending Itself’] (Official Web-site of the Fair Justice Project, 2015) <http://www.fair.org.ua/content/library_doc/FAIR_Report_Roman_David_Lust_and_Democ_2015_UKR.pdf> accessed 27 October 2020.
  41.  R Kuibida, ‘Suchasnyy etap sudovoyi reformy: peredumovy, klyuchovi podiyi I vyklyky’ [‘Current Stage of Judicial Reform: Background, Key Events and Challenges’] (Official web-site of the Center of Political and Legal Reforms, 27 November 2014) <http://pravo.org.ua/files/Curent_situation.pdf> accessed 20 October 2020; I Novozhylova, ‘Chy pobachytʹ ukrayinsʹka Femida lyustratsiyu?’ [‘Will Ukrainian Femida See Real Lustration?’] (Zhytomyr.Today, 21 September 2015) <http://zhitomir.today/blog/chi_pobachit_ukrayinska_femida_lyustratsiyu-id71.html> accessed 20 October 2020.
  42.  R Maseko, ‘Vyshcha rada pravosuddya realʹno zvilʹnyla lyshe 10 % “suddiv Maydanu”’ [‘The High Council of Justice Actually Dismissed only 10% of “Maidan's Judges”’] (Ukrains’ka Pravda, 24 September 2017), <https://blogs.pravda.com.ua/authors/maselko/59c810d71cd38/> accessed 20 October 2020; High Council of Justice Report (n 9); Report (n 95).
  43.  R Ursachi, ‘In Search of a Theoretical Framework of Transitional Justice Toward a Dynamic Model‘ in Erna Matanović Anđelko Milardović and others (eds.), Lustration and Consolidation of Democracy and the Rule of Law in Central and Eastern Europe (Political Science Research Centre 2007, Book 5) 67-83.
  44.  Report (n 9).
  45.  Report (n 95); Decision (n 96); Report of the Ministry of Justice (n 97).
  46. Report (n 95).
  47. Report of the High Council of Justice (n 9).
  48. Resolution No 3 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Ukraine ‘Pro zvernennya do Konstytutsiynoho Sudu Ukrayiny z konstytutsiynym podannyam schodo vidpovidnosti (konstytutsiynosti) deyakykh polozhenʹ Zakonu Ukrayiny № 1682-VII “Pro ochyshchennya vlady” polozhennyam chastyny tretʹoyistatti 22, statey 38, 58, chastyny druhoyi statti 61, chastyny pershoyi statti 62, chastyny pershoyi statti 64 Konstytutsiyi Ukrayiny’ [ ‘Adress to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine with a constitutional petition on the conformity (constitutionality) of certain provisions of the Law of Ukraine No 1682-VІІ “On Purification of Government” to the provisions of part three of article 22, articles 38, 58, part two of article 61, part one of article 62, part 1 of article 64 of the Constitution of Ukraine”] <http://www.scourt.gov.ua/clients/vsu/vsu.nsf/(documents)/4944FCD7E14A72AEC2257E0B002FAE8E> accessed 27 October 2020.
  49. S Kostezh, ‘Liustratsiia: politychni chystky za shyrmoiu reform’ [‘Lustration: Political Purges behind the Screen of Reform’] <http://ua.112.ua/analityka/lyustraciya-politichnichistki-za-shirmoyu-reform-52168.html> accessed 15 June 2019.
  50. S Shevchuk, ‘Liustratsiia yak retroaktyvna spravedlyvist: yevropeiski standarty zakhystu prav liudyny pry perekhodi do demokratychnoho pravlinnia’ [‘Lustration as Retroactive Justice: European Standards For The Protection Of Human Rights During The Transition To Democratic Regime’], (2006) 2 Yurydychnyi zhurnal 20-27 <http://www.justinian.com.ua/article.php?id=2140 > accessed 25 October 2020.
  51. Such a revision is done by the Supreme Court in accordance with Articles 361-369 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine. See Kodekc Admimistratyvnogo Sudochynstva Ukrayiny No 2747-IV, adopted on 6 July 2005 (with further amendments) [Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine] <http://zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2747-15> accessed 20 October 2020.
  52.  T Kozachenko, ‘Kryteriyiv, za yakymy mozhna lyustruvaty suddiv, duzhe malo: Intervʹyu vydannyu ZIK’ [‘There are Very Few Criteria that can be Used to Lustrate Judges: Interview to the Journal ZiK’] (ZIKTV Channel, 29 November 2017) <https://zik.ua/news/2017/11/29/tetyana_kozachenko_kryteriiv_za_yakymy_mozhna_lyustruvaty_suddiv_duzhe_malo_1216133> accessed 20 October 2020.
  53. The Registrar of the European Court of Human Rights, ‘Lustration proceedings against Constitutional Court president were unfair’ (The Official web-site of the European Court of Human Rights, 21 January 2016) , <http://www.euro-centre.eu/lustration-proceedings-constitutional-court-president-unfair/> accessed 25 October 2020.
  54. Tymoshenko v Ukraine (App No 49872/11) ECHR 30 April 2013 <https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-109460%22]} > accessed 20 October 2020.
  55.  Venice commission and directorate for justice and human dignity, joint opinion No728/2013 'On The Draft Law On The Temporary State Commission On Miscarriages Of Justice Of Georgia’, (Official Web-Site Of The Venice Commission, 23 May 2013) Para. 11 <Http://Www.Venice.Coe.Int/Webforms/Documents/?Pdf=Cdl-Ad(2013)013-E> Accessed 16 October 2020.
  56. Venice Commission, Amicus Curiae Opinion no 524/2009 ‘Opinion on the Law on the Cleanliness of the Figure of High Functionaries of the Public Administration and Elected Persons of Albania’ (Official web-site of the Venice Commission, 9-10 October 2009) para 149 <http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2009)044-e> aссessed 17 October 2020.
  57. Venice Commission, Final Opinion № 788/2014 ‘On the Law on Government Cleansing (Lustration Law) of Ukraine as Would Result from the Amendments, Submitted to the Verkhovna Rada on 21 April 2015’ (19-20 June 2015, para. 107) <http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2015)012-e> accessed 22 October 2020.
  58. Venice Commission, Opinion no 788/2014 ‘On the Law on Government Cleansing (Lustration Law)’ (Official web-site of the Venice Commission) <http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2014)044-e> accessed 27 June 2019.
  59. Venice Commission, Republic of Moldova Amicus Curiae Brief for the Constitutional Court Opinion no 847/2016 ‘On the Right of Recourse by the State Against Judges’ (Article 27 of the Law on Government Agent no.151 of 30 July 2015)’ (The official web-site of the Venice Commission, 13 June 2016) <http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2016)015-e> accessed 20 October 2020.
  60.  Vogt v Germany (App no 17851/91) ECHR 26 September 1995 <https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/6df4f3/pdf/> accessed 10 June 2020; Naidin v Romania (App No 38162/07) ECHR 21 October 2014 <http://base.garant.ru/70979206/> accessed 10 October 2020.
  61.  Vogt v Germany (n 47).
  62.  Y Lysianskyi, ‘Zamestitel' glavy VASU Mikhail Smokovich: “Odnimi vysokimi zarplatami doveriya k sudam ne vernesh’” [‘Vice President of the Highest Administrative Court of Ukraine, Mikhail Smokovich: “You Cannot Return Trust to the Courts only with the Means of High Remuneration”’] (Official web-site of the Highest Administrative Court of Ukraine, 4 May 2016) <http://www.vasu.gov.ua/123606/> accessed 30 October 2020.
  63. Zakon Ukrayiny ‘Pro ochyshchennya vlady’ 1682-VII [The Law of Ukraine ‘On Purification of Government’] [2014] Vidomosti of the Verkhovna Rada 44/2041 <http://zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1682-18/print1533984852614110> accessed 15 June 2019.
  64. Zakon Ukrayiny ‘Pro Vidnovlennya Doviry do sudovoyiy gilky vlady’ 1188-VІІ [Law of Ukraine ‘On Restoring Trust into Judicial Power in Ukraine’] [2014] Vidomosti of the Verkhovna Rada 23/870 <http://zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1188-18> accessed 25 October 2020.
  65.  Zakon Ukrayiny ‘Pro vnesennya zmin do Konstytutsiyi Ukrayiny (shchodo pravosuddya)’ No 1401-VIII, adopted on 2 June 2016 [The Law of Ukraine ‘On Amending Constitution of Ukraine (concerning justice)’] (2016) 18 Golos Ukrainy ; Zakon Ukrayiny ‘Pro sudoustriy i status suddiv’ No 1402-VIII, adopted on 2 June 2016, with further amendments [The Law of Ukraine ‘On Judiciary and Status of Judges’] (Official web-site of the Parliament of Ukraine) <http://zakon0.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1402-19> accessed 17 October 2020.
  66. Ždanoka v Latvia (App No 58278/00) ECHR 16 March 2006 <http://associationline.org/guidebook/action/read/chapter/4/section/jurisprudence/decision/102> accessed 28 October 2020.

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

Ukrainelustrationjudgesjudicial independencejudicial reform

How to cite it?

  • O Ovcharenko, T Podorozhna ’Lustration of Judges in Ukraine: National Insights and European Implications’ (2020) 4(8) Access to Justice in Eastern Europe 226-245.

Selected Articles

Latest Articles