HQCJ Decides Which Judges Will Be Left “Hanging” After the Start of the Appellate Court Competition
The High Qualification Commission of Judges (HQCJ) is about to shift its focus almost entirely to the upcoming competition for appellate courts, leaving little time to continue evaluating sitting judges’ fitness for office. Right now, the Commission is determining which judges will remain in limbo, potentially for months or even years, as they await their qualification assessments.
Since November 2023, the HQCJ has completed the qualification evaluation of 274 judges. It has reviewed 112 opinions from the Public Integrity Council (PIC), supporting 48 of them, while ignoring 64 and declaring those judges fit for office despite objections from the PIC.
Over the past month, the HQCJ has barely adopted any decisions in full composition. As a result, the current rate of PIC conclusion support stands at just 42.9%.
Summary of Qualification Assessment Outcomes to Date:
-
150 judges (54.7%) successfully passed the assessment and will remain in office.
-
47 judges (17.3%) were recommended for dismissal and referred to the High Council of Justice (HCJ).
-
77 judges (27.6%) were subject to other outcomes, including 47 cases where the HQCJ halted the evaluation because the HCJ allowed the judges to retire with honours before completing the integrity check.
So far, the reformed High Council of Justice has dismissed 12 judges based on HQCJ submissions but rejected 3 recommendations. Among those not dismissed are:
-
Yurii Nahorniuk, known for routinely shielding drunk drivers from liability;
-
Volodymyr Bordenyuk and Olena Shumeiko, both of whom were involved in rulings during the Maidan protests.
A Dangerous Trend:
The HCJ is increasingly delaying decisions on the dismissal of judges recommended by the HQCJ because the judges are filing appeals against the Commission’s findings in court. This creates a legal limbo in which disciplinary accountability is stalled, while judges continue to receive salaries funded by the state.
We urge the High Council of Justice to take responsibility and rule on the merits of these cases, rather than indefinitely postponing decisions and allowing low-integrity judges to remain on the bench at public expense.
