A criminal group in the Supreme Court probably tried to influence the election of members of the HQCJ. Among them, perhaps, are those in respect of which the PIC issued negative conclusions
Today, at a briefing of the heads of the SAPO and NABU regarding a large-scale corruption scheme in the Supreme Court, the director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, Semen Kryvonos, stated that the criminal group, among other things, tried to influence the election of members of the High Qualification Commission of Judges.
Could this not happen? It would be possible if the previous High Qualification Commission of Judges, which selected judges of the Supreme Court, would have really considered the conclusions and information from the Public Integrity Council and not overruled everything “automatically”. Among the 18 judges who made a decision in the case that became the subject of the investigation, three judges received a conclusion from the Public Integrity Council on non-compliance with the criteria of integrity. Regarding nine judges, the PIC provided information containing probable signs of dishonesty:
- Yu. Vlasov https://bit.ly/3M9BI3F and bit.ly/3o4hdgO
- V. Brytanchuk https://bit.ly/3My5mkJ
- I. Hryhorieva https://bit.ly/3o35Qpm
- M. Hrytsiv https://bit.ly/3MxAdhk
- Zh. Yelenina https://bit.ly/3OeE7wP
- I. Zheliezny https://bit.ly/3Ihu7Pn
- L. Katerynchuk https://bit.ly/3O9RgHm
- V. Knyazev https://bit.ly/3pM5nZh
- L. Loboyko https://bit.ly/42H98O4
- O. Prokopenko https://bit.ly/3M5cxiR
- I. Tkach https://bit.ly/3McbXjr
- S. Shtelyk https://bit.ly/42YX0I3
Noteworthy, we do not know for sure how many and which of these judges, according to the investigation, participated in the criminal group that was discussed at the briefing. However, this information is still indicative because the previous composition of the HQCJ systematically ignored the conclusions and information from the Public Integrity Council. In total, based on the results of the two competitions, the High Qualification Commission of Judges greenlighted 44 judges who received a negative conclusion from the Public Integrity Council, which made up almost a quarter of the Court’s composition.
Last week, the High Council of Justice finished conducting interviews with candidates for the High Qualification Commission of Judges and will soon make a final decision. This again highlights the importance of the decision it will have to make. The selection of approximately 2,500 judges and whether new members of such “back offices” will be in the system will totally depend on the new HQCJ. Right now, the High Council of Justice possesses an opportunity to make a choice that will prevent the recurrence of instances where the NABU and SAPO need to lay another solitaire made of judges’ dollars on another judge’s sofa.
