President Zelensky’s decree to repeal the appointment of Oleksandr Tupytsky and Oleksandr Kasminin is unconstitutional - 877A7
Back

President Zelensky’s decree to repeal the appointment of Oleksandr Tupytsky and Oleksandr Kasminin is unconstitutional

Читати українською

Today, the text of Decree №124 / 2021 appeared on the official website of the President of Ukraine, by which the President repealed the decrees on the appointment of Oleksandr Tupytsky and Oleksandr Kasminin as judges of the Constitutional Court.

This Decree is unlawful because the President is trying to dismiss judges of the Constitutional Court, however, he does not have such powers. Therefore, the President decided to further deepen the crisis around the Constitutional Court.

Obviously, the President’s next step will be to “appoint” new loyal “judges” to replace the “dismissed.” Thus, the President decided to continue to destroy an important institution that should protect the rights of citizens and the Constitution from arbitrariness.

Instead of destroying the Constitutional Court, the President and his party should have introduced a draft law on a transparent procedure for appointing judges to the Constitutional Court.

The Constitutional Court is likely to refuse to recognize the Presidential Decree because it is unlawful, and judges Tupitsky and Kasminin will remain in office. If the Constitutional Court agrees with the decree, it can be stated with certainty that the Constitutional Court is now completely under the control of the President.

The only legal way to dismiss a judge of the Constitutional Court is by a decision of the Permanent Ethics Commission of the Constitutional Court. Unfortunately, the Constitutional Court now lacks independent judges of high integrity who would care about its authority.

Currently, the only way to change the composition of the Constitutional Court and ensure its integrity is to introduce a transparent procedure of selection and appointment of the Constitutional Court judges, which is insisted on by public experts. Instead, the President is simply violating the Constitution to appoint loyal candidates to the Constitutional Court.

–says Stepan Berko, Advocacy Manager at DEJURE Foundation

This case is by its nature reminiscent of the recent ruling of the Constitutional Court on the unconstitutionality of the decree appointing NABU Director Artem Sytnyk.

Other news
To the section
New rules bring new risks. What the draft law on the selection of HCJ members changes
New rules bring new risks. What the draft law on the selection of HCJ members changes

The government’s draft law submitted to the Venice Commission for consideration, in addition to a new procedure for forming the HQCJ, also substantially changes the procedures for electing (appointing) members of the High Council of Justice (HCJ). The proposed changes may create new risks for...

The government proposes a “broken bicycle” for international experts in the commission selecting HQCJ members
The government proposes a “broken bicycle” for international experts in the commission selecting HQCJ members

The High Qualifications Commission of Judges (HQCJ) is a body that can recommend a person for the position of judge or recommend their dismissal. That is, whoever decides your case, should you suddenly have to go to court, depends on the HQCJ’s assessment. Judges over judges, so to speak. Logi...

DACK cases and judges can end up in the same court again
DACK cases and judges can end up in the same court again

The High Qualifications Commission of Judges (HQCJ) has recommended transferring 6 judges of the liquidated DACK to the Kyiv District Administrative Court (KDAC). All the cases of the liquidated DACK had previously been transferred to the KDAC as well. In other words, the nameplate has changed, but...