HQCJ defines composition of the Expert Council for selection to Administrative Courts: candidates with questionable reputations included

Today, the High Qualification Commission of Judges (HQCJ) formed the Expert Council, which is to assist in the selection of judges for the newly created administrative courts. These courts will replace the liquidated District Administrative Court of Kyiv. They are mandated to consider lawsuits against the Cabinet of Ministers, central executive authorities, the National Bank of Ukraine, NABU, SAPO, NACP, and others.

The Expert Council includes international experts Robert Hein Broekhuijsen, Jessica Lott Thompson, and Sigita Rudenaite. The Council of Judges of Ukraine (CJU) also delegated its representatives, and these appointments raise the most concerns. Out of nine candidates, the HQCJ selected three, each of whom faces the following reservations:

• Olena Hanechko, judge of the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal. Her integrity has repeatedly been questioned by both the HQCJ and the Public Integrity Council. Hanechko is known for numerous controversial decisions, for example, she refused to consider a motion to arrest Serhiy Kalynovskyi, the stepson of Dmytro Firtash, who committed a fatal car accident and fled abroad. She also violated declaration requirements and was included in the list of 47 judges whom the President proposed dismissing for oath violations.

• Yevhen Synelnykov, judge of the Supreme Court. He was part of a panel that issued a ruling harmful to freedom of speech: the Supreme Court declared false the statements of MPs who called High Council of Justice member Pavlo Hrechkivskyi “odious.” This effectively restricted the scope of value judgments in public statements — something the DEJURE Foundation had already flagged as problematic.

• Valeria Chorna, judge of the Appeals Chamber of the High Anti-Corruption Court. According to the Anti-Corruption Action Centre, together with her colleagues, she systematically disrupted chamber meetings, blocking the election of its head. Her declarations show signs of undervaluing property, and some of her rulings raise serious concerns. For example, refusing to confiscate the assets of Russian oligarch Oleh Deripaska or releasing from custody the director of ZTMK, linked to Firtash, who left Ukraine the day after sentencing.

The example of the Expert Council shows that under the quota of the Council of Judges of Ukraine, individuals with serious integrity concerns once again entered judicial selection bodies. This calls into question the effectiveness of forming the new administrative courts. At the same time, the decisive voting power of international experts provides hope that the selection of future judges will be conducted in line with principles of fairness, independence, and adherence to the highest standards.

The DEJURE Foundation, together with partner NGOs, will closely monitor the work of the newly created Expert Council. We will continue to report on the course of competitive procedures, on the candidates taking part, and on their compliance with the criteria of integrity and professional ethics. Only a transparent process with genuine influence from independent experts can ensure the establishment of quality administrative justice in Ukraine and prevent the emergence of a “second District Administrative Court of Kyiv” within the judicial system.