Low-integrity judges remain in office: the High Council of Justice ignores Qualification Commission’s dismissal submissions

The High Council of Justice (HCJ) is showing contradictory performance. While it dismisses some low-integrity judges, it ignores recommendations to dismiss others. Since the relaunch of the High Qualification Commission of Judges (HQCJ) and the resumption of the qualification assessment, 51 judges have been recommended for dismissal. The next step lies with the HCJ, as it is the only body authorised to remove a judge from office.

Only 11 of the judges recommended for dismissal by the HQCJ have actually lost their positions — just 21% of all submissions. In this way, the HCJ undermines the results of the renewed HQCJ’s work and slows down the cleansing of the judiciary. The HCJ has not made decisions on 65% of the HQCJ’s dismissal submissions, in most cases, not even starting their review. Only 18 judges (35% of all HQCJ submissions) have received decisions on their future in office.

How the HCJ is slowing down judicial cleansing:

• Refusing dismissal despite serious violations: Hanna Yatsenko and Yuriy Nahorniuk delayed drunk driving cases and failed to declare property. “Maidan judges” Volodymyr Bordeniuk and Olena Shumeiko issued rulings against activists of the Revolution of Dignity. Since the renewed HQCJ began its work, the HCJ has kept five judges in office despite HQCJ dismissal recommendations.

• Granting retirement with lifetime payments, bypassing HQCJ recommendations: Hanna Andriienko, who delayed nearly 50 drunk driving cases.

• Halting reviews due to lawsuits filed by the judges themselves challenging HQCJ decisions: This is a common tactic for judges seeking to keep their positions — filing a lawsuit and then asking the HCJ to withhold any decision until the Supreme Court (SC) rules. The SC has repeatedly sided with low-integrity judges. The HCJ has full authority to proceed with dismissal recommendations, but chooses to do nothing.

• Ignoring HQCJ recommendations: some have been waiting for review for almost 1.5 years — for example, cases of Judges Kliuchnyk, Lozynska, and Vasyliev. Judges of the District Administrative Court of Kyiv, Kovzel, and Maidan-judge Chernov received dismissal recommendations back in autumn 2024 but remain in office. The delays are the responsibility of HCJ members serving as rapporteurs in individual cases.

• Postponing reviews indefinitely: as in the cases of judges Lutsenko, Khramtsov, and Rychka. The latter was repeatedly caught driving under the influence and even threatened police officers with physical violence.

As a result, low-integrity judges keep their powers, salaries, and influence over the judiciary.

The delays in reviewing HQCJ dismissal submissions show the need for changes to the HCJ’s Rules of Procedure:

• Give HQCJ dismissal recommendations priority status;

• Set a specific deadline for HCJ decisions;

• Suspend judges’ retirement requests until the HCJ considers the HQCJ’s dismissal recommendation.

The HQCJ has now temporarily suspended qualification assessment to focus on competitions for appellate courts. This is the ideal time for the HCJ to review the 65% of submissions that have been stalled for months. The DEJURE Foundation also calls on the HCJ to stop the practice of “freezing” cases due to judges’ lawsuits. Judicial reform will not succeed if the HCJ, as a key player, sabotages its role.