Draft Law No. 14149: a threat to independent selection of Constitutional Court judges

The Verkhovna Rada may pass in the first reading the harmful draft law No. 14149 or its no less harmful alternative No. 14149-1. Both documents restrict the independence of the Advisory Group of Experts (AGE) in the selection of judges for the Constitutional Court (CCU). They also create the risk of political “re-evaluation” of the conclusions of independent experts.

The AGE, which includes Ukrainian and international experts, is responsible for verifying the moral qualities and professional competence of candidates for the position of Constitutional Court judge. Completing the CCU’s composition is part of the so-called Kachka-Kos plan (key EU requirements for Ukraine in 2026). Yet the process of selecting judges for vacant positions is already proceeding with significant delays — not least because candidates recommended by the AGE may appear “inconvenient” to the appointing entities: the President of Ukraine, the Verkhovna Rada, and the Congress of Judges of Ukraine.

The Venice Commission warned back in December about the risks posed by draft laws No. 14149 and No. 14149-1. In its opinions on these bills, the Commission drew attention to several key risks:

• The “auxiliary” status of the AGE.

The bills propose to assign the Advisory Group of Experts the status of an “auxiliary body.” In Ukrainian realities, this means a direct risk of subordination to political appointing entities. The Venice Commission explicitly recommends against including this provision in the law, as it is unnecessary and potentially harmful to the independence of the AGE.

• Administrative control by the Constitutional Court itself.

The bills provide for the transfer of the AGE’s secretarial and administrative functions to the Secretariat of the Constitutional Court. This may create additional levers of influence over a body that is supposed to be independent — in other words, control mechanisms built into the law.

• Disclosure of AGE materials.

The bills require experts to transmit to parliament and other appointing entities copies of all documents and all information gathered during the evaluation of candidates. However, the confidentiality of the AGE’s internal evaluation materials is a key condition for trust in the competition. It protects candidates from reputational harm, prevents pressure and information leaks, and guarantees that strong candidates will not withdraw from the selection process. The requirement to disclose all data nullifies this entire balance.

Bill no. 14149 also contains a provision regarding “evaluated candidates.” If the document enters into force, the AGE will be compelled to disseminate data on those candidates who “failed” the experts’ qualification assessment — creating the risk of a “re-evaluation” of the international experts’ conclusions. Judicial appointing entities will be able to return to the competition candidates who did not pass the integrity filter.

This bill and its alternative act are contrary to Ukraine’s obligations to the EU, as they undermine the procedure for independent vetting of CCU judge candidates. All of these risks open the path to the politicisation of the CCU judicial selection competition by weakening the independence of the AGE.

The DEJURE Foundation calls on members of parliament to take into account all the risks of Bill No. 14149 and No. 14149-1 and not to vote for either of them, as they do not comply with Ukraine’s obligations to the EU and jeopardise the independence of the competition for positions on the Constitutional Court of Ukraine — and with it, the chance to have a truly independent CCU, without which no reforms will work.